APHC010117292025 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: 2521/2025 Between: Ponnathota Jayaraju ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Sho ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. MATADA YUVASIVA SWAMY 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 petitioner herein, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.9 of 2025 of Mylavaram Police Station, Y.S.R. District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 351(3) and 308(5) read with 3(5) of the BNS. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, on 28.01.2025 at about 09.10 p.m. near cement bricks factory situated at Mylavaram Bypass road, Dommaranandyala Village, two unknown offenders came on motorcycle, boarded the complainant on their motorcycle while the complainant was going by walk on the road by saying with gullible words that they will drop him at Koilakuntla bypass road. But they has taken away the complainant towards Tadiparti road instead of Koilakuntla cross road, got stopped their vehicle at Mylavaram bypass. On suspicion when the 2 complainant by putting him in a fear of death saying that they will kill him if he do not choose to give money to them and they fled away from the place on the same motorcycle. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State. Perused the material on record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein is innocent, only basing on the confessional statement, the name of the petitioner herein is arrayed as accused. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 31.01.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner further would submit that by this time most of the investigation might have been completed and hence, he prays this Court to grant bail to the petitioner. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition stating that specific allegations made against the petitioner and the presence of the petitioner at the scene is identified by CCTV footage and the investigation is not completed. 6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material on record, there are specific allegations attributed against the petitioner and it is not the stage to decide the culpability by accepting the allegations. In the light of the severe accusations made against the petitioner 3 and the investigation is at crucial stage, petitioner 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.2521 of 2025 DATE:17.03.2025 ASR