IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5610 OF 2025 ,,/ -I+ Betwee n : Goddilla Chandra Reddy @ Ramachandra, Reddy, S/o. Late Krishna Reddy, aged about 50 years, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. JangavaripaIIe, Kurabalakota (M), Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh . Petitioner/A-7 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Station House Officer, Mudivedu Police Station, Mudivedu ChI'ttOOr District. Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravathi, Guntur District. Respondent Petition under Section 482 of BNSS/438 of Cr.P.C., is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Station House Officer, Mudivedu Police Station, Mudivedu, Chittoor DI-Strict, Andhra Pradesh to release the petitioner/A-7 on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with F.I.R. No.51 of 2025 dated 08.03.2025 on the file the Station House Officer, Mudivedu Police Station, Mudivedu, Chittoor District, AP a/ / / The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri. GUTTAPALEM VIJAYA KUMAR Advocate for the Petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent; The Court made the following: ~ ^ (CGR,J crl.p.Nor.5610 of 2O25) APHCO10274152025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5610/2025 Between : GoddiIIa Chandra Reddy @ Ramachandra Reddy ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. GUTTAPALEM VIJAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the followin order: (CGR,J Crl.P.No.5610 of2025) Present Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 (1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2025 (for brevity tthe BNSS') seeking anticipatory bail with respect to Crime No.51 of 2025 of Mudiveedu Police Station, Annamayya District, registered for the offences punishable under section 329(3), 324(4), 109(1) read with 3(5) BNS. The petitioner herein is arrayed as A-7. 2. As per the complaint alleged by the c/e facfo complainant, on 13.03.2025 accused, A`1 to A-7, have collectively attacked the c/e facfo complainant with iron rods and axes in order to kill them, however, the de facfo complainant and his associates, have likely escaped from the said scene and thereafter lodged the present complaint. The entire incident was occurred due to land dispute arose between the accused and the cye facfo complainan{. 3. lt is stated that A-1 to A-4 and A-6 have already been arrested and were enlarged on bail. Insofar as A-7 and A-5 are concerned, their first bail application has been rejected and even the second bail application also came to be rejected. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on bare perusal of the complaint and even on the fact of it] there is no attack or injury, as such, the attempt portrayed as attack and in the absence of any ``±- -| i- -_ _-----i \ \ _` 3 (CGR,J Crl.P.No.5610 of2025) injuries or medical repor{i the question of implicating the accused for offences under Section 329(3), 324(4),109(1) read with 3(5) BNS is completely erroneous. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, opposed to grant anticipatory bail and contends that serious accusations are made against the accused, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. Perused the record and considered the rival submissions. 7. A bare perusal of the complaint goes to show that A-1 to A-7 have tried to attack the de facfo complainant in relation to civil disputes between them, however, no way complaint discloses that there was any real physical attack or cause of injuries and at any rate, the trial Court has already enlarged the other accused on bail, the petitioner herein, is also entitled to consider for anticipatory bail. 8. In view of the afor`esaid submissions, the bail application is ordered with the following directions: a) ln the event of arrest of the petitioner, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,OOO/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties each for the like slJm each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; <,i-_r 4 (CGR,J Crl.P.No.561O of2025) b) The p6titioner shall make himself available for investigation as and when required; c) The petitioner shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution w-ItneSSeS; d) The petitioner shall appear before the statibn House Officer concerned once in i week i.e., on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet. e) The pet-ItiOner Shall not leave the District limits without the express perm-ISSiOn from the Station House Officer concerned. 9. Accordingly, the criminal Petition is allowed. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/-K.J.RAJA BABU ASSISTAN ISTRAR SECTION OFFICER !? ` . / //TRUE COPY// 1. The Station House Officer, Mudivedu Police Station, Mudivedu, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh. To, 2. One CC to Sri. GUTTAPALEM VIJAYA KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two cos to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. [OUT] 4. One spare copy JSS \ , HIGH COURT CGR, J DATED :22/05/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.5610 of 2025 ALLOWED