APHC010148212025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 177 AND 178 OF 2025 Criminal Appeal No.177 of 2025: Between: 1. PRADEEP @ PALAGIRI PRADEEP, S/O DAVID, AGED ABOUT 32 YRS, R/O SIONPURAM, PULIVENDULA TOWN, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. MECHANIC SAMELU @ BELLAM SAMUEL, S/O YESOPU, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O. SIONPURAM, PULIVENDULA TOWN, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...APELLANT(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI. ...RESPODENT Criminal Appeal No.178 of 2025: Between: 1. RAVI @ MANJULA RAVI KUMAR, S/O RAMACHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 34 YRS, R/O D.NO. 1-3-477, CHENNAREDDY COLONY, PULIVENDULA TOWN, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. HARI @ VALLEPU HARENDRA, S/O ESWARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O. AHOBILAPURAM, PULIVENDULA TOWN, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...APELLANT(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI. ...RESPODENT Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 The Court made the following: COMMON JUDGMENT: The instant criminal appeals have been filed by the Appellants/Accused seeking to set aside the Orders dated 18.03.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.Nos.341 and 340 of 2025 respectively in Crime No.108 of 2025 on the file of the Court of Special Sessions Judge for trial of offences under SC/ST (PoA) Act Cases- cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa and to grant anticipatory bail to him. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 20.02.2025 at about 6.30 p.m., while the De facto complainant was at his house, on hearing the cries and shoutings, he went there and found that the Accused Nos.1 to 4 intended to kill some other persons. On seeing the De facto Complainant, the Appellants herein and two others abused him. Accused Nos.3 and 4 caught hold of him, Accused No.1 beat him with a road on his right hand, Accused Nos.2 and 3 beat him with a stick on his chest and right knee resulting in swelling injury and Accused Nos.3 and 4 beat him with a stick. They also abused him in the name of his caste. Based on the complaint given by the De facto Complainant, a case in Crime No.108 of 2025 on the file of Pulivendula U/G Police Station, Kadapa, has been registered against the Appellants herein for the offences under Sections 118(1) and 109 read with 3(5) of BNS and Section 3 (1) (r) (s) and 3 (2) (va) of SCs & STs (PoA) Act. 3. Heard Sri D.Purnachandra Reddy, learned counsel for the Appellants/Accused and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State/Respondent. 3 4. Learned counsel for the Appellants/Accused would submit that the Appellants herein are falsely implicated in the present case and the allegations leveled against them are false and baseless. Learned counsel would further submit that this is a counter case to the case in Crime No.107 of 2025 which was registered against the sons of the de facto complainant herein, wherein the Appellants herein were injured. Learned counsel would submit that the De facto Complainant herein is not even admitted in the hospital. It is submitted that the offence under provisions of SCST (PoA) Act does not attract against the Appellants/Accused Nos.2 and 4. Hence, prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the Appellant. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that the due to the injuries sustained by the De facto Complainant in the hands of the Appellants, he was admitted in the hospital and was discharges after 10 days. However, Wound Certificate is not yet received. It is submitted that specific allegations are made against the Appellants in the commission of the alleged crime and the investigation is at the nascent stage. Hence, prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. Perusal of the material on record would disclose that, the anticipatory bail applications filed by the Appellants herein before the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kadapa have been dismissed vide Orders dated 18.03.2025 in Crl.M.P.Nos.341 and 340 of 2025 respectively. Admittedly, a counter case has also been registered against the sons of the De facto Complainant herein and others based on the 4 complaint lodged by the Accused herein. A bare perusal of the material on record would further disclose that there are disputes between the parties with regard to the supremacy in the village. Admittedly, the offence under Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SCST (PoA) Act does not attract against the Appellants/Accused Nos.2 and 4 since they belong to SC Community. However, the allegations mentioned in the complaint prima facie show that there are specific allegations against the Appellants to attract the offences under Sections 118(1) and 109 read with 3(5) of BNS. Further, the Wound Certificate of the De facto Complainant is not yet filed. Furthermore, as submitted by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, material part of the investigation in the present crime is pending. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that, though it is not the stage to decide the culpability of the Appellants in the commission of the alleged offences, in view of the allegations to prima facie attract the offences under Sections 118(1) and 109 read with 3(5) of BNS, the question of granting anticipatory bail to them, at this stage, does not arise. The appeals lack merit and the same are liable to be dismissed. 7. Resultantly, the Criminal Appeals are dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:08.04.2025 Dinesh 5 THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.177 & 178 of 2025 DATE:08.04.2025 Dinesh