APHC010116522025 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: 2536/2025 Between: Sri Birudala Eswar Reddy ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. S S BHATT 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.32 of 2025 of Tirupati Rural Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 65(1), 64(2)(f)(i), 115(2), 127(2) and 351(2) of the BNS and Section 5 (I)(n) read with 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 12.01.2025 the accused who is stepfather of the victim child, in the absence of inmates, forcibly dragged the victim child into bed room and by raising T.V. volume, committed rape against her twice and threatened her to kill if she reveals the same to anybody. After the arrival of her mother, the victim informed the same to her. 2 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 has been in judicial custody since 28.01.2025 and there is a delay of 13 days in lodging the present complaint by the mother of the victim girl. Learned counsel for the petitioner further would submit that there are property disputes between the petitioner herein and mother of victim, this false case has been foisted for the sake of property. Learned counsel for the petitioner further would submit that by his time most of the investigation is completed and hence, he prays to grant bail the petitioner herein. 5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner and there is one criminal antecedent against the petitioner relating to POCSO Act in the year 2016. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said case was ended in acquittal in favour of the petitioner. It is submitted by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor that the investigation is at crucial stage and some more witnesses are to be examined. 6. A perusal of the material on record to show that the acts alleged against the accused are grave in nature and considering the nature of 3 offences committed on a minor girl and the case is still under investigation and some more witnesses are to be examined. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner does 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.2536 of 2025 DATE:17.03.2025 ASR