APHC010186132025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4057/2025 Between: Karri Satish Reddy ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SRAVAN KUMAR NAIDANA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER: 1. This is the Criminal Petition filed by Petitioner/Accused No.1 under Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) [previously filed under sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973] seeking regular bail in Cr.No.104 of 2025 of Duvvada Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable under sections 109(1), 74, 329(4) r/w.3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’). 2. The Prosecution’s case, in brief, is that on 12th March 2025, at approximately 19:30 hours, while the de facto complainant was heading home from the Maddivanipalem Bus Stand, a group of individuals seated at the bus 2 stop made inappropriate remarks and used un-parliamentary words against the defacto complainant. On 14.03.2025, at approximately 09:00 hours, while the de facto complainant was washing dishes at her residence, one individual who had been seated at the bus stand on 12.03.2025 (Karri Satish Reddy), the petitioner/A.1 herein, arrived at her home. He then initiated an argument with her and used un- parliamentary language and the petitioner/A.1 pressed her neck tightly and touch her chest. The petitioner beaten her on cheeks and grabbed her hair and dragged her along the road. One Maddi Raju, who is residing to her next door tried to pacify the issue, but the petitioner/A.1 and one Yakanth Reddy (A.2) attacked on Maddi Raju and he tried to run away from the spot immediately, but the petitioner/A.1 and the Yakantha Reddy (A.2) attacked Raju with the help of long stick and rock and that they will tried to kill him and beaten on his head. Basing on the report of defacto complainant, the present case has been registered. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner/A.1 submits that the petitioner’s brother, who is A.2 in this case, is the de facto complainant in another matter, specifically Crime No.103 of 2025. Both the incidents are alleged to have occurred simultaneously. Learned counsel further asserts that the petitioner has been in custody since 15.03.2025. 4. The allegation against the petitioner in this case is that the petitioner assaulted the de facto complainant with a stone. When ascertained from the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, he submitted that the defacto complainant has been discharged from the hospital and there is no threat to her life. 5. As seen from the record, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 15.03.2025. Considering the nature of the accusations leveled against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that further detention of the petitioner/A.1 is no longer necessary. It has been submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Maddivanipalem in Visakhapatnam District, and there is no likelihood of his fleeing away from justice. Additionally, his release 3 would not result in the tampering of evidence or the hindering of the investigation. Upon inquiry, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor confirmed that no criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioner. The record further suggests that the incident in question occurred in the heat of the moment when the petitioner visited the defacto complainant's house to confront her regarding comments made about him. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner/A.1 with some conditions. (a) The Petitioner/A.1 shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two (02) sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Visakhapatnam District; (b) On release, the Petitioner/A.1 shall appear before the Investigating Officer concerned once in a fortnight i.e., on Sunday in between 10.00 AM to 01.00 PM for a period of two (02) months; (c) The Petitioner/A.1 shall not directly or indirectly contact or threaten the witnesses under any circumstances and any such attempt shall be construed as an attempt of influencing the witnesses and shall not tamper evidence and shall cooperate with the investigation. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO Date: 25.04.2025 MS 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4057 of 2025 Date: 25.04.2025 MS