Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail To Three Accused Of Agitation Over Renaming District After Ambedkar

It is alleged that on a call given by the Konaseema Sadhana Committee, a huge number of people gathered to submit objections to the decision, in violation of Section 144 of the CrPC and Section 30 of the Police Act. They were joined by other and they eventually marched towards the collectorate. On their way, the mob pelted stones at the police who were discharging their duties and burnt BVC college bus which was being used as a transport vehicle for the police.

The mob also pelted stones at the police at the collectorate office and some police officers sustained injuries. Glasses at the collectorate office and Ambedkar Bhavan were damaged. Later, the mob proceeded to the Red Bridge, intercepted two RTC buses, damaged them and set them to fire. The mob further moved towards the house of an MLA and pelted stones, damaging some glasses. When the cousin of the MLA tried to intervene, the mob poured petrol on him. He managed to escape. The mob entered the house of the MLA, set fire to the motorcycles, the furniture and the house.

It was submitted on the behalf of the petitioners that their names were not figured in the complaint initially. They sought to consider the present petitions in similar lines with earlier petitions in which bail was granted. They contended that the petitioners were languishing in jail since 30.05.2022.

On the other hand, the Special Assistant Public Prosecutor argued that the involvement of the petitioners was evident from the photographs taken at the scene of offence and that the investigation was still pending. He drew the Court's attention to the Supreme Court decision in Kodungallu Film Society v. Union of India, in which it was held:

"A person arrested for either committing or initiating, promoting, instigating or in any way causing to occur any act of violence which results in loss of life or damage to property may be granted conditional bail upon depositing the quantified loss caused due to such violence or furnishing security for such quantified loss.."

Citing this case, he prayed the Court to impose some costs for the loss to the State.

The Court noted that a perusal of the complaint disclosed that, initially, it did not reflect the petitioners' names. Their names were included after the confession statement by one of the witnesses. The Court also noted there was no evidence to show that the petitioners had damaged any property, so the Kodungallu Film Society was not applicable at the current stage and the request of the Special Assistant Public Prosecutor to impose costs could not be considered.

Accordingly, the criminal petitions were allowed.

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Click Here To Read/Download Order