IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE <*r PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5594 OF 2025 Between: C Srinivasa Rao @ C Srinivasulu, S/o. C Krishna Rao, Aged 31 years, Occ Private Employee, R/0. H.No;"4-192-29B, Shantha Gudi, Adoni Town, Kurnool District. ' ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. ■ ...RESPONDENT Petition under Section 482 of BNSS & Corresponding Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioner/Accused on bail in the event of her Arrest in Cr. No. 61 of 2025 on the file of Adoni I Town Police Station, Kurnool District. This Petition coming on for hearing upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri KALE VIJAYA RAJU ,Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following ORbER ; ■ '4 1 1 (CGR,J Crl.P.No.5594 of 2025) APHC010273892025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0MS [3506] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5594/2025 Between: C Srinivasa Rao @ C Srinivasulu ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.KALE VIJAYA RAJU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER:- The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C, (Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) by the petitioner/Accused for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.61 of 2025 of Adoni I Town Police Station, Kurnool District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 75 (1), 78(1)(i), 351 (2)oftheBNS. 2 (CGR,J Crl.P.No.5594 of 2025) 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the victim is working as a cook in the house of the relatives of the accused at Bangalore. During that time, the accused became acquainted with the victim and began speaking with her over the phone. They also took photographs together, and the accused expressed his intention to marry her. On the pretext of marriage, the accused frequently visited his relatives' house in Bangalore and misbehaved with the victim, claiming that he wanted to marry her. Despite her objections, he continued to take photographs of her on his mobile phone. Later, the victim came to know that the accused had a questionable character, and she subsequently ceased all communication with him. On coming to know the same, the relatives of the accused took her back to her parental home. Thereafter, the accused began harassing her and coercing her to marry him. He threatened to publish their photographs in the media and also threatened to kill her parents and sabotage her future marriage prospects. The accused also shared the photographs with the victim's father and brother, thereby causing damage to her reputation. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State. Perused the record. Sri.Kale Vijaya Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing for some time, has confined his argument to the extent of protecting the petitioner herein from the coercive action by the police on the ground that the offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years and prays this Court to direct the police to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. On the other hand, Sri. Panini Somayaji, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor did not oppose the same and concurred with the 4. 3 (CGR,J Crl.P.No.5594 of 2025) submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner for the reason that the offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Since the offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years, this Court directs the police to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, scrupulously, as per the guidelines enunciated in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another^ 6. 7. With the above directions, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Criminal Petition, shall stand closed. Sd/-KJRAJA BABU assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, , Adoni, Kurnool District Police Station, Kurnool Additional District and Sessions Judge House Officer, Adoni I Town 1. Then 2. The Station District, i. Kale Vijaya Rafu Advocate [OPUC] Public Prosecutor High 3. One CC to Sri Court of A.P at Amaravati [OUT] 4. TwoCCto 5. Three CD Copies SD VACATION COURT HIGH COURT DATED:22/05/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.5594 of 2025 / 26 MAY 2025 ^ Curreni seciion ^V >^^fSPATCV^^-^ to DISPOSEING THE CRIMINAL PETITION