Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10155 (AP)

KANNOJU HARIPRASAD v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/2441/2025 · 2025-03-17

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010114642025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2441/2025 Between: Kannoju Hariprasad and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. K NARSI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order: This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, has been filed by the petitioners herein/A4 and A5, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.9 of 2025 of Parvathipuram Town Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 111(2)(b), 319(2), 318(4) and 308(2) read with 3(5) of the BNS and Section 66D of the I.T.Act 2000- 2008. 2. Case of the prosecution is that on 10.01.2025, the defacto complainant filed a report before the police stating that on 18.12.2024 afternoon at about 12.00 hours, he received a phone call from an unknown number. In that call, an unknown person posed himself as Sub-Inspector of Police, Vijayanar Police Station and threatened him that one person has rented a car with Aadhar Proof of the defacto complainant and got damaged public property and cut the phone call by saying that CBI Officer would talk to him about it. On the same day, at about 15.00 hours, one person by name Akash called the defacto complainant and threatened him that there was a charge on the defacto complainant that he had cheated 183 members by luring them with jobs and collected 2 three crores from them and also sent an arrest warrant to the defacto complainant through whatsapp. On the next day, at about 09.30 hours, the said Akash called the defacto complainant and told him that if he wants to put his arrest warrant on hold, he should pay Rs.15,00,000/- instantly and also to make safe deposit to another Rs.15,00,000/-. Frightened by the words of the culprit, the defacto complainant made RTGS transfers of total Rs.41,50,000/- to the bank accounts provided by the culprits in different spells. On coming to know about the cheating committed by the culprits, the defacto complainant filed the present report as against the accused before the police. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State. Perused the material on record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners herein are innocents of the offence as per the remand report the amount is transferred on 06.12.2024 that is much prior to the registration of the crime. Learned counsel for the petitioner further would submit that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 20.02.2025, by this time most of the investigation might have been completed and there is no reference with regard to names of the petitioners herein in the complaint and hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioners herein. 5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are specific allegations made against the petitioners herein and this is a organized crime and investigation is at nascent stage and in case of release of the petitioners herein at this stage they may hamper the evidence and influence the witnesses and it is a big scam in the name of digital arrest and they have looted money from the public. 6. A perusal of the material on record goes to show that it is a case of digital arrest and in the name of digital arrest the petitioners herein 3 extracted money from the victims as reported by the prosecution from the bank transactions between the petitioners and others accused and the investigation is at crucial stage. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, petitioners do not deserve for grant of bail at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. ____________________________________ Dr. VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA,J Date: 17-03-2025 ASR 4 THE HONOURABLE SMT DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2441 of 2025 DATE:17.03.2025 ASR