Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Sammeta David Raju vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 25 June, 2025
APHC010277292025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3521]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5731/2025
Between:
Sammeta David Raju and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S)
Others
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
KUNUKU RAJA SEKHAR
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity „the Cr.P.C‟)/
Sections480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023(for brevity „the BNSS‟), seeking to enlarge the petitioners/Accused
Nos.1 to 4 on bail in Cr.No.60 of 2025 of Bhattiprole Police Station,
Bapatla District, registered against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4
2
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.5731 of 2025
Dated 25.06.2025
herein for the offences punishable under Section 108 of „the BNS‟ and
later Sections 329 (4) of „the BNS” and Section 3 (2) (v) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 (for brevity „the Act‟).
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to
withdraw the petition against Petitioner No.1/A-1/Sammeta David Raju.
The petition against Petitioner No.1/A-1 is accordingly dismissed as not
pressed or withdrawn
3. Necessary facts are that the mother of the complainant obtained
loan from Five Star Business Finance Ltd., by mortgaging her house
about one year ago. Initially, she paid loan amount installments for six
(06) months later she could not pay. On that the petitioners, who are the
agents of Five Star Finance Company came to her house and harassed
her to repay the loan amount. On 08.04.2025 at about 5.30 PM, the
petitioners came to the mother of the complainant and asked her to
repay the loan amount, abused her, threw the household articles outside
and insulted her in the public as “DABBULU KATTALENI DANIVI
ENDUKU TISKUNNAVE CHAVAVE” due to their words, she mentally
agonized and committed suicide by handing to ceiling of the house with
saree. The son of the deceased gave a complaint to the police.
3
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.5731 of 2025
Dated 25.06.2025
4. Sri Kunuku Rajasekhar, the learned counsel for the petitioners,
submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence; the
petitioners are innocent; the petitioners are leading their lives peacefully
by honest means; they have small children and aged parents; the
petitioners have fixed abodes and sureties; they would not flee from the
clutches of justice; they were falsely implicated in this case; the
petitioners would abide by any conditions imposed by this Court; the
material portion of the investigation has been completed; the petitioners
have been languishing in jail for the past 63 days, and therefore urged to
be enlarged on bail.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that
Petitioner No.2/A-2/Gunturu Naveen and Petitioner No.3/A-3/Mandru
Sunny Babu belong to the SC Mala Community, and Petitioner No.4/A-
4/Pulivarti Vamsi Krishna belongs to the SC Madiga Community.
Therefore, the provisions of „the Act‟ are not applicable to the case on
hand. The Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 have been languishing unnecessarily in
jail. The learned Judicial Magistrate concerned, while remanding
Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4, had not verified or taken into consideration the
averments of the Remand Report, which clearly state that Petitioner
Nos. 2 to 4 belong to the SC Community. Unfortunately, the learned
4
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.5731 of 2025
Dated 25.06.2025
Special Judge, while considering the two bail applications filed by
Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4, did not appreciate the facts, although the same
was brought to the notice of the learned Special Judge by the learned
counsel.
6. Per contra, Mr. Neelotphal Ganji, the learned Assistant Public
Prosecutor, submits that when successive bail applications have been
dismissed by the learned Special Judge, Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 ought to
filed an appeal under Section 14-A of „the Act.,‟ and filing a regular bail
application is hit by Section 14-A of „the Act‟. Therefore, this bail
application is not maintainable, while admitting that the provisions of „the
Act‟ are not applicable to Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4, and urged to dispose of
the matter in the interest of justice, as Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 have been
languishing in jail for the past 63 days.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned
Assistant Public Prosecutor.
8. Perused the record.
9. Indeed, the Investigation Officer at the time of forwarding the
petitioners to the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate for remand clearly
stated at Page No.3 of the Remand Report that Petitioner No.1/A-1
5
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.5731 of 2025
Dated 25.06.2025
belongs to Kapu, OC Community, Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 belong to SC
Mala Community, and Petitioner No.4/A-4 belongs to SC Madiga
Community.
10. Ironically, the learned Special Judge, without going into the
averments of the Remand Report that the Petitioner Nos.2 to 4 are
belongs to SC Community, erroneously and in a mechanical way
observed that a prima facie case was made out against the Petitioner
Nos.2 to 4 for the offence punishable under „the Act‟.
11. Of course, the provisions of „the Act‟ are not applicable to
Petitioner Nos.2 to 4 for the simple reason that Section 3 of „the Act‟
begins with the phrase “whoever, not being a member of the SC or ST
Community”. If the assailants belong to the SC or ST Community, the
criminal provisions of „the Act‟ are not applicable to them. Another
allegation is that the petitioners have abetted Banavath Padma to
commit suicide because of their foul words.
12. As seen from the record, in this case as many as 13 witnesses
have been examined by the Investigating Officer, that shows that
material portion of the investigation is completed. Considering the nature
of the allegations levelled against the Petitioner Nos.2 to 4, their alleged
role played in this case, the stage of investigation, and the period of
6
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.5731 of 2025
Dated 25.06.2025
detention undergone by them, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the
Petitioner Nos.2 to 4 on bail, but with stringent conditions.
13. In the result, the Criminal Petition against the Petitioner No.1/A-1 is
dismissed as withdrawn and the Criminal Petition is allowed in favour of
Petitioner Nos.2 to 4, with the following conditions:
i. The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 4 shall be enlarged
on bail subject to them executing a bond for a sum of
Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each with two
sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the
learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Repalle.
ii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 4 shall appear
before the Investigating Officer, on every Saturday in
between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till conclusion of the Trial.
iii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 4 shall not leave the
headquarters of the District without express permission of
the learned Trial Judge.
iv. The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 4 shall surrender
their passport, if any, to the Investigating Officer until the
conclusion of the trial. If the petitioners do not have a
7
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.5731 of 2025
Dated 25.06.2025passport, they shall submit an affidavit to the Investigating
Officer to that effect.
v. The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 4 shall give their
complete address particulars along with their Mobile
numbers to the Investigating Officer.
vi. The Petitioners/Accused Nos. 2 to 4 shall not, either
directly or indirectly, threaten, force, or exert undue
influence on the witnesses.
vii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 4 shall not interfere
in the investigation process, but they shall cooperate with
the Investigating Officer in further investigation of the case
and shall be available to the investigating officer as and
when called by him. Violation of any of the conditions shall
automatically entail cancellation of bail by the learned Trial
Court.
_________________________
DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J
Date: 25.06.2025
RSI
8
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.5731 of 2025
Dated 25.06.2025THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5731 of 2025
Date: 25.06.2025
RSI