Vijayawada: Andhra Pradesh high court on Monday dismissed the anticipatory bail petitions filed by the accused in the 2023 Gannavaram TDP office attack case. Justice VRK Krupasagar said the petitions were inadmissible under the law and directed the petitioners to approach the lower courts for relief.
Several persons, reportedly YSRCP supporters, vandalised the TDP office at Gannavaram in Krishna district in Feb 2023. Gannavaram police registered cases against multiple individuals, including Ch Krishna Rao and 32 others. Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra and public prosecutor Menda Lakshminarayana told the high court that initial charges against the accused were filed under various sections of Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, provisions under the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act were later added, as some of the victims belonged to those communities. The public prosecutor emphasised that under section 14(A) of SC/ST Act, anticipatory bail petitions must first be filed in the relevant lower court, and appeals can only be made to the high court after an order is passed by the lower court. Accepting the arguments, the HC dismissed the anticipatory bail pleas. The petitioners were granted liberty to approach appropriate lower courts for bail.
Several persons, reportedly YSRCP supporters, vandalised the TDP office at Gannavaram in Krishna district in Feb 2023. Gannavaram police registered cases against multiple individuals, including Ch Krishna Rao and 32 others. Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra and public prosecutor Menda Lakshminarayana told the high court that initial charges against the accused were filed under various sections of Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, provisions under the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act were later added, as some of the victims belonged to those communities. The public prosecutor emphasised that under section 14(A) of SC/ST Act, anticipatory bail petitions must first be filed in the relevant lower court, and appeals can only be made to the high court after an order is passed by the lower court. Accepting the arguments, the HC dismissed the anticipatory bail pleas. The petitioners were granted liberty to approach appropriate lower courts for bail.
