(Prayer: IA NO: 3 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased to suspend the execution of sentence for a period of 4 days only and release the Petitioner/Accused No.1. on Bail, pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal No.325 of 2025 efore this Hon’ble Court,: preferred against the Judgment in Sessions Case No.133 of 2019, Dated 16.04:2025 on the file of the Principal essions Judge, Prakasam at Ongole, arising out of Crime No.156pf 2018 of Maddipadu Police Station, Prakasam District, and pass)
A. Hari Haranadha Sarma, J.
1. This is an application filed in terms of Section 430 of BNSS corresponding to Section 389 of Cr.P.C. seeking to suspend the execution of sentence for a period of (4) days only and release the petitioner/Accused No.1 on Bail.
2. Criminal Appeal No.325 of 2025 is filed by the accused No.1 and 2, questioning the conviction and sentence passed in Sessions Case No.133 of 2019 dated 16.04.2025 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Prakasam at Ongole, arising out of Crime No.156 of 2018 of Maddiapdu Police Station, Prakasam District .
3. Under the impugned judgment, the accused No.1 and 2 /appellants were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC and were sentenced to undergo LIFE IMPRISONMENT and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- each, in default of payment of fine, they shall suffer Simple Imprisonment for a further period of Six months.
4. Now the present application is filed by accused No.1, with the following submissions:-
[i] A1 is the owner of the Lorry bearing No.AP 27 TY 5656, TATA- 3518, 12 Tyres Model-2016. On behalf of A1, his wife sold the said vehicle to one Gottam Krishna Murthy, S/o.Srinivasulu, Resident of Ongole for Rs.9,65,000/- out of the said amount Rs.1,00,000/- was taken as an advance amount, balance was agreed to be paid after transfer of the vehicle.
[ii] When the wife of A1 approached the Jail authorities and requested them to permit her husband for the sale of the vehicle etc., they advised her that Court permission is necessary and without the Court permission they cannot allow anything.
[iii] He further submits that his father/A2 is also in Jail, and his wife is a lonely woman, facing financial troubles and if the vehicle is not transferred to the purchaser, they will suffer.
[iv] In the context stated, the petitioner prayed for suspension of the sentence for a period of (4) days and release him on bail for enabling him to sell his vehicle.
5. Heard both sides extensively.
6. Sri I. V. N. Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for sale of the vehicle in question belonging to the petitioner, his presence is necessary and in view of the financial deficiencies of the family of the petitioner/accused, his release may be ordered as prayed for. He further submitted that at least if Jail authorities are directed to permit execution of certain documents necessary for the purpose of transfer of the vehicle referred, the same will serve the purpose.
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the release of the petitioner is not necessary and it is a desperate attempt to defeat bar as to granting of bail and the petitioner ought to have placed material as to the necessity of his physical presence for transfer of the vehicle duly certified by the transport authorities.
8. [i] Requirement of physical presence or any other procedure to be followed as stated by RTA authorities, is not placed by the petitioner.
[ii] It is relevant to note that the transfer of a vehicle can be effected by its owner by authorizing a family member or any trusted person/friend through a Special Power of Attorney. The Special Power of Attorney of document shall contain the necessary particulars like make, model and registration number etc.. The attestation of the Special Power of Attorney can be done by Jail Superintendent or any other Officer of Gazetted cadre. Required RTA Forms, entrustment of Form Nos.28, 29 and 30, shall be enclosed along with the transfer forms. Further, necessary documents like Registration Certificate, insurance certificate, address proof of seller and buyer, photos of both the original owner, buyer can be enclosed.
[iii] The Special Power of Attorney holder can initiate transfer of ownership online and if the system require Aadhar based OTP, the Special Power of Attorney holder can be present physically and attest the documents at RTO Office, to bypass digital verification if authorization is given by the petitioner/A1. This process is suggestive.
[iv] As per the submissions made across the Bar, if the RTA authorities require any other mode of authorization etc., from the petitioner- A1, the Jail authorities can accommodate the same by attesting required documents.
9. In view of the above aspects and upon considering objection that granting of bail on the grounds stated is not possible an-d as the alternative option is available, this Court finds that the petitioner may avail the option of transfer of the vehicle through his Special Power of Attorney agent by signing in the necessary documents, attestation of his signature, if necessary by the Jail authorities, the same shall be done by them.
10. In the light of the discussion made above, the I.A. is ordered as follows:-
1) The petitioner can process the transfer of the vehicle mentioned through his Special Power of Attorney agent.
2) The petitioner can sign on the documents necessary viz., Special Power of Attorney documents or any other forms, which can be attested by the Jail authorities.
3) Orders passed now are limited to the extent of permitting execution of necessary documents by the petitioner/A1 for transfer of vehicle bearing No.AP 27 TY 5656 and its attestation by the Jail authorities.
4) Concerned RTA will entertain the transfer as per the Rules and regulations and law applicable.
