Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17197 (AP)

Akula Prathap Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

CRLP/4938/2025 · 2025-05-08

T Mallikarjuna Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY, ^ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJlTnA RAC^I CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4938 OF 2025X" ba Between: 1. Akula Prathap Reddy, S/o Chinna Reddy, aged 29 years, D.No.4, Seetanagaram, Kunavari Palli Post-Cum-Panchayathi, Kahajipet Mandal, Kadapa District. 2. Ghanapuram Ramana, S/o Ramana, aged 46 years, D.No.3/144, Krishnapuram, Thatigutia Panchayathi, KSM Entering College Post, Chintakomma Dinne (CK Dinne) Mandal, Kadapa District. ...Petitioners/Accused No.1 & 2 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, at Amaravati. ...Respondent Petition under Section 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C & New Section 480 & 483 of BNSS, 2023, is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the Petitioners/Accused No. 1&2 in Crime No. 17 of 2025 on the file of RSASTF Police Station, Tirupati District, for offences leveled against the petitioner under Sections 303(2) r/w 3(5) BNS 49, 61(2) BNS, and Sec. 20(1)(d)(i)(a) r/w 20(1 )(c) ii, iii, iv, x, 36(a) r/w 32A of the AP Forest Amendment Act, 2016. ^ The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Sivaprasad Reddy Venati, Advocate for the Petitioners and of Public Prosecutor for Respondent, the Court made the following <y APHC010233562025 IN THE KIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4938 OF 2025 Between: Akula Prathap Reddy, and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1.SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER:- ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT This Criminal Petition, u/Sec.480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioners/A1 and A2, seeking bail, in Crime No. 17/2025 of RSASTF Police Station, Tirupati. The above said crime was registered against the petitioners herein and others for the offence punishable u/Sec.303(2) r/w 3(5), 61(2) of B.N.S 2. "N 2 Sec.20(1)(d)(i)(a) r/w 20 (1)(c) ii, iii. iv, x and Sec.36(a) r/w 32A of A.P. Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: On 04.4.2025 at about 6.00 pm, near Seethanagaram, Pattur Forest Beat, Khajipet Forest Section, Proddutur range, Kadapa Forest Division, Khajipet Mandalam, Kadapa District, the RSASTF staff found A1 and A2 with 8 red sender logs in their possession. Then police apprehended said two persons and on enquiry, they disclosed their identity particulars as A1 and A2. Police arrested them, seized the logs and two motor cycles. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that they have been in judicial custody from 05.4.2025 and most of the investigation is completed and prays to allow the criminal petition. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed to grant bail on the ground that investigation is not completed. 6. Fleard both sides. A perusal of material on record goes to show that A1 and A2 were arrested and 8 red sander logs were seized. The petitioners have been in judicial custody from 05.4.2025. Hence this Court found that further detention of the petitioners is not necessary to conduct further investigation. When ascertained, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that no antecedents are registered against these petitioners. The petitioners had and 3. 4. 5. 7. 3 permanent abode as such there is no possibility of their fleeing away from justice. Most of the witnesses are official witnesses and the release of the accused would not cause tampering of evidence and hampering of investigation. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following 7. conditions; (i) The petitioners/A1 and A2 herein shall be released on their executing a personal bond for Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class for trial of cases relating to Red Sanders Smuggling, Tirupati; (ii) On release, the petitioners shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon, for a period of two (02) months; (iii) the petitioners shall not interfere in the investigation and they shall not cause tampering of evidence of hampering of investigation. SD/- M.PRABHAKARA RAO ASSISTAN^J(3ISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Judicial Magistrate^First Class of Trail of Cases relating to Red Sanders Smuggling, Tirupati. 2. The Superintendent, Sub Jail,”Tirupati. 3. The Station House Officer, RSASTF Police Station, Tirupati District. 4. One CC to Sri Sivaprasad Re(^3y Venati, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCS to PUBLIC Pf^SECUTOR, High Amaravati.[OUT] 6. One spare copy. Court of A.P., HIGH COURT TMR,J DATED:09/05/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.4938 of 2025 ALLOWED