+.-I 7 I IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAR MONDAY ,THE THIRTY DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4233 OF 2025 [3327] Between : pala venkata Appala Raju, S/o. Late Rambabu, aged 50 years, R/o. D.NO.10-7-ll/1, Ram Nagar, Visakhapatnam-530 002I Working in Indian Armed Forces Civilian, Kerala, presently came down tO Visakhapatnam. Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep, by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, High Cou-rt Premises, Amaravathi. Respondent petition under section -482 of BNSS is filed praying that. in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the criminal petition; the High Court may be pleased to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner/Accused in the event of h-ls arrest in connection With Crime No.36 of 2025 on the fi`le of the SHO, Ill Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam. The petition/Appeal coming on for hearing, upon Perusing the Petition and the grounds filed -ln support thereof and upon hearing the arguments Of sri G RAMA GOPAL Advocate for the Petitioner, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) for the Respondent and the Court made the following. APHCO10200032025 EELE IN THE (H:pGeHc[CaA:ToU:lgi:PaR:AJA¥NfiDsT:]Rc:oPn:ADESH [3327] MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY £E±!MINAL PETITION NO: 4233/2Q2§ Between : Pala Venka{a Appala Raju H.PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State OfAndhra Pradesh l|.RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.G RAMA GOPAL Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Ih±_Court Made the FoI[owinq Orde± The Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the BNSS, is filed on behalf of the petitioner herein to grant anticipatory bail in connection wit:h Crime No.36 of 2025 of Ill Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam commissionerate, registered for the offences Punishable under Sections 318(4) of the BNS and Section {_--=ss-a I_*" =,=-=r 2 J| 21(1)(2)(3) of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019- 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is thaton 17.02.2025, the de facto complainant filed a report before the police stating that she has been residing in a rented house at Ramnagar, Visakhapatnam City, along with her children. Her husband left her 15 years ago. She is in a relationship with the accused, who is working at the j Dockyard. The accused induced her by promising to take care of her and her children, and she believed his words. He then told her that he would start a real estate business in her name, as he is a government employee, and subsequently collected an amount of {1,20,00,000/- in the name of debts. He made her issue cheques and promissory notes to the persons who lent the money, as a form of assurance to them. However, he neither started the real estate business nor returned the money. When those persons demanded repayment, he refused to return the money and'thereby cheated both her and the persons who had given the money. 3. Heard learned counsel for ttle Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State. Perused the record. ''.`-- \ .'` 4. Since the petitioner is a Government employee, he convinced the defacto complainant to give personal cheques and promissory notes to individuals as seculrity. But, the petitioner did not commence real estate buSineSSI Thereafter, he was transferred to Kerala two years ago. As the petitioner has not returned the money, the defacto complainant resorted in filing the present complaint. It appears the present complaint has been filed for recovery of the Said amount. , police called the petitioner to appear before-them and accordingly, he appeared on 27.12.2024 to 29.12|2024 and 31.12.2024, and also on 21.01.2025, 24.O1.2025 and 27.01.2025, before the Ill Town police, Visakhapatnam. All the transactions appear to have been done with cheques and PrOmiSSOry notes Which are Signed by the defacto complainant. There is any amount of ambiguity whether the aforesaid offences would attract to the present facts and circumstances of the case or not. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstanceSLof=the-case, this Court is inclined to consider request of petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail. `--` ``-I_ -I.----I 6. Accordingly, jn the event of his arrest I-n the above crI-me, the petitioner here[-n shall be released on ba" on his executl-ng a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two suretleS each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting poll-Ce OfflCjalS and also on condition that the petitioner shall make hI'mSelf available for I|nVeStI-gall-on as and when required and that he shall not caLISe any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution wI-tneSSeS. The petitioner shall appear before the station House offl'cer concerned, once in a week, till fI-ling of the charge sheetI 7. AccordI-ngly, the criminal PetitI-On iS allowed. //TRUE COPY// Forl SD/-M.SRINIVAS sAEScSi:oT€#:IEcGEIRS TRA R To] 1. The Station House Officer, llI` Town police station, visakhapatnam. 2. I,One-CC..€to ., SRI. G RAMA GOPAL Advocate [OPUC] 3. i-wo CCs t3` public prosecutor (AP) High Court ofA.P., Amaravati [OUT]' <. 4. One spare copy*. .. <§r. i.`: ,. : =`.n.::ife€-i '_+,a +v _ t A HIGH COURT SRK,J - DATED:30/06/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.4233 Of 2025 ALLOWED