S.No./

W.P.No.

Petitioners/Respondents

Filing/

Disposal/

Follow-up

1

W.P.7081/97

MP.8504/97

SAKTI Vs

1. State of A.P. rep. by its Chief Secretary and 5 others.

Relief sought: To issue an order directing the respondents to suspend the all further proceedings including arrest etc., pursuance to the FIR 106/96 of Jeelugumilli PS on 28.12.96 pending W.P.No.7081/97 on the file of the High Court.

Disposed On : 15-Nov-2002

Order

2

Cr l .P No. 2633/97

In

Cr No.42/97

P.Siva Ramakrishna

P.Sarada Devi

Vs

S.I.Jeelugumilli PS

State of A.P rep. By P.P

Relief Sought: To direct the S.H.O Jeelugumilli P.S to release the petitioners on bail in event of their arrest in connection with
Cr No.42/97

Relief Granted: " This is a peculiar case where the petitioners deserve to be released on anticipatory bail even though the offences alleged are apparently of serious nature. Upon hearing learned counsel for petitioner and learned public prosecutor one thing is clear that the petitioners are not criminals in the sense normally understood, they are infact leading a social organization for the benefit of tribal people. The main allegation over the petitioners is that they are instigating the tribals to grab or take possession of lands from the forest area which are in possession of non tribals. However, that is not indicated any where that the petitioners have directly or indirectly instigated or exhorted the tribals to commit assaults or murders. The murder which is an offence registered in the case is apparently outcome of some incident at the spur of moment. We are not concerned with that, the role of the petitioners who are prima facie social workers is such as it does not justify arresting them for offence of murder as such. In fact the police could have vigilant and could have taken appropriate preventive steps under the chapter proceeding of Cr.P.C. if they wore aware of the object for the agitation that was being conducted. However, one thing prima facie appears clearly that the petitioners though are trying to lead the tribals for obtaining social justice for them are really not in a position to control the tribals at all levels.

In the circumstances, I am of the view that thought the petitioners deserve to be released on anticipatory bail"

***

"They are also permitted to attend any court proceedings pending against them or to comply any court order which is passed against them."

Filed on 28-07-97

3

W.P 21692/99

Naram Alivelu

V/s

S.I. Chintalapudi

Disposed On : 19-Feb-2003

4

W.P.3377/2001

Telegram petition

Sarada Devi . Petitioner

Relief sought: To issue any appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for the disappearance of Petitioner's husband, Sri Naram Srirama murthy from the custody of 1. Narasapuram police who arrested him in connection with crime No.25/99 of T.Narasapuram police station by declaring the negligence and inaction of the respondents to protect the petitioner's husband as illegal and void.

Disposed On : 05-Mar-2001

5

Crl.P.No.

645/2001

In

Crl.No.58/2000

P.Siva Ramakrishna

P.Sarada Devi

Vs

S.I.Jeelugumilli PS

State of A.P rep. By P.P

Relief Granted: " The petitioners are accused of the offences under sec.147,148, 324, 307 r/w. sec.149 IPC. And under sec.25 of Indian Arms Act. The allegation against the petitioners is that they lead a mob of tribals in attacking non-tribals in respect of some dispute as to occupation of land. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is firstly there are no overt-acts attributed to the petitioners and that they have been included in the FIR in an omnibus manner stating that they were leading the tribals. It is then pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the police has been registering a number of cases against the petitioners along with tribals and in all such cases the petitioners has been granted anticipatory bail by this court. The learned Public Prosecutor also states that it is true that the petitioners have been granted anticipatory bail in a number of cases which were registered against them.

Considering these circumstances, it appears a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. "

Disposed On : 26-Feb-2001

Case material/Order

6

Cr L M P.No. 1262/2001

In

Crl.P.No.1033/2001

P.Siva Ramakrishna

P.Sarada Devi

Vs

S.I.Jeelugumilli PS

State of A.P rep. By P.P

Relief sought : To stay the investigation in cr. No 15/2001 of Jeeligumilli P.S

Relief Granted: "Interim stay"

Disposed On : 03-Apr-2001

8

Cr L M P.No. 4624/2002

In

Crl.P.No.1033/2001

P.SIVARAMA KRISHNA V/S SMT.K.NAGAMANI & STATE REP.PP.HYD.

Disposed On : 29-Apr-2005