'- of# lN THE HIGH COURfOF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA WEDNESDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2981 OF 2025 Betwee n : Gudipati Brahma Naidu, S/o. Chandrayudu, aged about 52 years, R/o. D.No.198, Praneet Knighthoods, Beeramguda, Hyderabad, Telangana State. Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi, Through S.H.O. of Anantapur Rural P-S. Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 482 of BNSS (438 of Cr.P.C.,) praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Accused/Petitioner herein on Anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest by the s.H.O. of the Anantapur Rural p.s. and its staff in cr.No.53 of 2025 COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER : SRI. MADHAVA RAO NALLURI COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER -----,,., --., .--,L_i,, ;,.,, APHCO10133562025 IN THE HrGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2981 OF 2025 Between : Gudipati Brahma Naidu, .MPETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. MADHAVA RAO NALLURI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER:I The Criminal Petition, u/See.482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is filed on behalf of the petitioner/accused to grant anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.53/2025 of Anantapur Rural Police Station, Ananthapuram District. cG3S23f+a ` `\ 2. The above said crime was registered against the petitioner/accused for the offence punishable u/see.316(4), 318(4), 351(1)of the B.N.S. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondenvstate. 4. The case of the prosecution is as follows: On 19.02.2025, the Director of the-de facfo complainant's Company submitted a report stating that the petitioner is an employee in the said company and took an amount of Rs.92,2O,000/- in total of his salary advance, vendors payments, land owners payments and his personal uses and he left the company without informing and without giving proper resignation letter to management and misappropriated the amount that belongs to the Company, with fraudulent intention and thereby cheated the company. He also threatened the management of the company with dire consequences, as if the de facfo complainant's Company call him once again, he will see their end. Hence, the present crime. 5. Heard. Perused the record. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of Seven years and less than Seven years and the Petitioner iS entitled for issuance of notice under section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha sanhita, 2023 as reported in Amesh Kumar's case and prays tO enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. 7. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the Submission Of the petitioner and further contended that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required to ascertain the information as to the diversion of funds of the company. 8. As seen from the material, the rePOrtSaid tO have lodged against the petitioner on 19.02.2025. According to the contents Of the report, the petitioner worked as an employee in the Company i.e., Goldenglobe lnfra Private Limited and the Petitioner has taken loan amount of Rs.20,00,000/- at the time Of his employment from the company as an advance to his daughterls medical course entrance fee. He has also taken an amount Of Rs.13,70,000/-pending salary advance. 9. Simply because the Petitioner has received some amount towards his daughter's medical course entrance fee and also taken amount as pending salary advance, it cannot be treated as a embezzlement of funds. The other accusation made against the petitioner is that he introduced two persons from Tadipatri, Ananthapur, as land owners Stating them aS his relatives and On his . \ a:gr-3i+er - I 4 J| assurance, the dl'rector of the company pal'd jn total an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- I-n whI'Ch Rs,25,20,000/- (12,60,000/- each) to Mr.K.Jagannath and Mr. K. Ranganath on 25.01.2023 through bank transfer and Rs.24,80,000/-through cash from the office and collected the receipt of document from them. upon questl-onl'ng the same with the land owners, they said that they handed over the document to Mr.Gud[|patj Brahma NaI'du/petitl-oner herel-n, but the petjtf-oner escaped wl-th the document, without handing over it {o the company. 10. slmply because the company has pal'd some amount at request of the petitI'Oner to the persons introduced by the petltioner, baslng on the allegatI|OnS made jn the petition, at this stage, lot l's djff,'cult to conclude that the offence alleged agaI|nSt the petl|tjoner are prl-ma face made out. No reasons are mentI-Oned in the report explainI'ng the delay of more than two years in gl-ving report to the police. The alleged fact that the incident occurred about three years back, thlls court fl|nds it diffI'Cult to accept the contention jn the petition that custodial I'nterrogatI-On of the petI|tiOner is requI'red. Since the petI'tiOner I-s shown to be permanent resident of Hyderabad, there I-S no possl'biII'ty Of h,'s flee,'ng away from justI-Ce ConsiderI'ng the submissjons of learned publlc prosecutor that the presence of the petl-tI-Oner is required to '\ _TTPPFF= . `\} conduct further investigation, this court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with some stringent conditions. ll. ln the result, the Crim'lnal Petition iS allowed With the following conditions-. i. ln the eve'nt of his arrest, the petitioner/accused herein shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.50,00O/-(Rupees fifty thousand Only) with two (o2) sureties for a like Sum each tO the satisfaction of the arresting police officials and the petitioner is directed to join investigation; ii. After release, the Petitioner Shall appear before the station House Officer concerned, Once in a Week i.e., On every sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 01.00 p.m., for a period of three (03) months. iii. the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence and hamper the investigat-Ion and shall cooperate for investigation. sD/-K.TATA RAO DEPUTY RE9lSTRAR SECTION OFFICER /ITRUE COPY// To'1. The Slat-ton House Officer, AnantaPur Rural P S, AnantaPur D'lstriCt 2. One CC to SRl. MADHAVA RAO NALLURI Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P[OUT] 4l One spare COPY Jr/ HIGH COURT TMR,J DATED :02/04/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.2981 of 2025 ALLOWED riFT . - I: -J= r\ \, ,~+ \.C o4 APR"5 '{ +` F`=S::ftFTserf ;/I:-i