APHC010132522025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2927/2025 Between: Kuldeep Sharma ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SRINIVASA RAO BUSI 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/A1, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.6 of 2025 of Eluru I Town Police Station, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4) and 305(a) of the BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 12.01.2025, the de facto complainant filed a report before the police stating that his father owns a jewelry shop. On 11.01.2025, he and his father closed the shop as usual and returned home. The next morning, on 12.01.2025, at around 11:00 a.m., they found that the back wall of the shop had been broken, creating a hole that allowed unknown culprits to gain entry into the shop and commit 2 theft. Upon verifying the inventory, the de facto complainant found that gold items weighing 300 grams and silver items weighing 40 kilograms, with a total value of Rs. 18.00 lakhs, had been stolen by unknown culprits. 3. Heard. Perused the record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 06.02.2025 and most of the investigation is completed and prays to grant bail to the petitioner herein. 5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the petitioner is a habitual offender. After being released on bail for another crime, the petitioner committed theft and was arrested in connection with the present crime. He further submitted that as many as six witnesses were examined in the present crime, and some more witnesses are yet to be examined. In the event of the petitioner's release, there is a strong possibility that he may resort to committing similar acts. 6. Considering the nature of the offence and in view of the submissions made by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor that, after being released on bail for another crime, the petitioner resorted to committing theft, and investigation in the present 3 case is still pending and some more witnesses yet 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. _____________________ T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO, J 26.03.2025 ASR 4 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO Criminal Petition No.2927 of 2025 Dated: 26.03.2025 ASR