IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.4899 of 2025 Between: Kuncham Avinash Benjamin. S/o. (Late) Kuncham Benjamin Prasad, Aged 32 years, D.No.11-30-42/2, James Street, Opp CBM High School Road. ...Petitioner/Accused No.2 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through the S.H.O., Bheemunipatnam P.S., Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravathi. ...Respondent/Complainant Petition under Sections 480 & 483 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/A-2 connection with the Crime No.413/2024 of Bheemunipatnam Visakhapatnam by Allowing the Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri R Siva Sai Swarup, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor behalf of the Respondent. on Bail in P.S., on The Court made the following ORDER : APHC010233312025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4899/2025 Between: 1.KUNCHAM AVINASH BENJAMIN, S/0 (LATE) KUNCHAM BENJAMIN PRASAD , AGED 32 YRS, D.NO. 11-30-42/2 JAMES , STREET, OPP CBM HIGH SCHOOL ROAD ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Through the S.H.O., Bheemunipatnam P.S., Rep., by its Public Prosecutor High Court at Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.RSIVASAI SWARUP Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER:- The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail in Cr.No.413 of 2024 of 2 Bheemunipatnam Police Station, Visakhapatnam, registered against the petitioner/Accused No.2 herein for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 308(2), 127(2), 123, 131, 351(2), 109, 6(12) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000. The facts of the prosecution in a nutshell is that the Petitioner/Accused No.2 colluded with Joy Jamima/Accused No.1 and indulged in honey trapping by luring the gullible rich persons and extorted huge amounts in crypto currency. The Petitioner in collusion with Accused No.1 trapped rich persons took their photographs and videos with Accused No.1, threatened them and extorted from them huge money and gold, on a threat that if they did not yield their request they would post the photographs and videos in social media. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 with the help of other accused trapped several rich people in the society and extorted money from them. The Petitioner with the aid of Accused No.1 and other Accused used to threaten several persons and extorted money illegally. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 2. 3. Sri R.Siva Sai Swarup, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has irot committed any offence and he was falsely implicated in this case. The Petitioner would abide by any condition to be imposed by this court. 4. Per contra, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that the Petitioner has been involved in similar 5. 3 1/ offences, the investigation is not completed and some more material witness have to be examined and the amount in crypto currency have to be traced out and recovered. If the Petitioner is enlarged on bail, he would hamper the investigation and threaten the witnesses with dire consequences; and he would escape from the clutches of law; and urged to dismiss the bail petition. I have perused the entire material available on record produced by the Investigating Officer. The accusations are well founded against the Petitioner. If the Petitioner is enlarged on bail at this juncture, there is every likelihood of Petitioner hampering the investigation and threatening the witnesses. Investigation clearly discloses that the Petitioner conspired with Accused No.1 and other Accused, extorted huge amounts in crypto currency by threatening innocent people. Therefore, it is not right stage to enlarge the Petitioner on bail. Hence the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. 7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. SD/- M.PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The XV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 2. The Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 4. The Station House Officer, Bheemunipatnam Police Station, Visakhapatnam District. 5. One CC to Sri R Siva Sai Swarup, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravathi[OUT] 7. Three CD Copies TK TAC m VACATION COURT 1 HIGH COURT DATED:22/05/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.4899 of 2025 DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION