lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.I 3051 OF 2025 Between : Bodireddy Venkata Manikanata @ BV, S/o BV Reddy, Age 25 years, DNo 30-1-104, Pothuvari Veedhi, Assam Gardens, Vl'sakhapatnam. Petitioner/Accused No 2 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court ofAP, Amaravathi Through Station House Officer, Maharanipeta Police Station, Visakhapatnam District. Respondent Petition under Sections 480 & 483 of BNSS (old Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C), prayl-ng that I'n the Circumstances Stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criml-naI Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on Regular Bail in Crime No ll of 2025 dated 10.2.2025 on the file of Maharanipeta police station, visakhapatnam city and District. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed I'n Support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri s SRINIVASA RAO, Advocate for the petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent and the court made the following; APHCO10142792025 lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl (Special 'OriginaI Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3369] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3051/2025 Between : Bodireddy Venkata Manikanata Alias Bv ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.S SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainamt: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the fo![owing: ORDER: This Criminal Petition, u/Sec.480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner/accused, seeking bail, in Crime No.ll/2025 of Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate. 2. A case has been registered against the Petitioner and Others fOrthe offence punishable u/See.109, 79, 74, 329(3), 329(4) r/w 3(5) of B.N.S. 3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State. 4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, iS that, One Mandangi Vamsi (hereinafter referred to as defacto complainant) is resident of |I 2 Maharatlipeta, visakhapatnam living by running an auto. on o9.02.2025, the defacto complainant along with his wife Latha went to his brother in law's house in his auto and returned back to his house at about ll.30 pm. A{ about ll.30 pm, they parked the auto at state Bank of India ATM, near ootagadda and they were going to their home on foot. on the way wh]|le crossing the bridge of ootagadda, except A4, Al to A3 drinking alcohol at NTR Bridge, near ootagadda. on seeing the defacto complainant and his wife, Al to A4 caused nuisance, for which the defacto complainant scolded them and that A2 and A3 tried to beat them and further Al and A4 also chased the defacto complainant and his wife to kill them and that they went into their house. Then Al to A3 misbehaved with the defacto complainant and quarreled with them. Al to A4 broken the door, dragged the defacto complainant from the house, beat him with hands, stones, bricks and damaged the electrical bulbs and also threatened that they would kill him. ln the meanwhile, the owner of the house came out and that A2 caused inJ'urieS tO the Wife Of the defacto complainant, when the surrounding people gathered there, Al to A4 ran away. Basing on the complaint of the defacto complajnant, the crime was registered and during the course of investigation, arrested the petitioner on 10.02.2025. 5. Heard. perused the record. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 10.02.2025. Even reading of the contents of t, -= I,,i+ 3 the FIR discloses that the identity of the petitioner in the crime through hearsay and no specific attributions have been made against him and prays to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that investigation in this case was not completed and according to the case of the prosecution, he is said to have caused injuries on LW3 M.Latha on left hand and prays to dismiss the petition. 8. After careful observation of the material on record and submissions made on behalf of both sides, even according to the learned Assistant Pub,ic Prosecutor, the injured said to have been sustained inJ®urieS, have been discharged from the hospital and there is no danger to their life. lt is stated that the petitioner has to attend supplementary examinations of B.Tech and to show that he is an engineering student, the petitioner has filed identity card. As the petitioner has been remanded to judicial custody on 10,02.2025, this Court find that most of the investigation might have completed with regard to the role played by the petitioner in the commission of the offence. When ascertained, learned Assistant public Prosecutor submI'tted that the Petitioner has no antecedents. The petitioner has permanent abode as such there is no possibility of his fleeing away from the J®uStiCe. Considering the submissions made, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 4 9. ln the result, the Cr-lminal Petition is allowed With the following conditions: (i) The petitioner/accused herein Shall be released On his execut'lng a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two (o2) sureties for a like Sum each to the satisfaction of the learned ll Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam; (ii) on release, the petitioner shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned On every 2nd and 4th Sunday between lO.00 a.m. and 01.00 p.m., for a Period Of two (02) months. (i-li) the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence and hamper the investigation and shall cooperate for investigation. SD/- Fol //TRUE COPY// K.SRINIVASA RAJU ___-^B lsTRAR oFFtCER __--.`-|\ ASSISTAN To'1 The H AddltlOnal Ch[ef Judlclal Magistrate, VisakhaPatnam 2. The Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, VisakhaPatnam 3. The Superintendent, Central Jail, VisakhaPatnam 4. The Station House Officer, MaharaniPeta Police Station v'lsakhapatnam city and District 5. One CC to SRl. S SRINIVASA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two cos to Public Prosecutor, High Court Of AP [OUT] 7. One spare COPY KJ II HIGH COURT TMRJ DATED: 01 /04/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.3051 of 2025 ALLOWED +.I