I-t IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE : PRESENT: y¥:TL THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO '`:`,¢`{` CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5726 OF 2025 Between : Chidaraboina Srinu, S/o Ramesh, Aged 28 years, Occ Student, R/o. D.NO.1- 138A, Pedapallepalem Village Chirala MandaI, Bapatia District. ...Petitl-oner/ Accused No.2 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ...Respondent Petition under Section 482 of BNSS is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with FIR No. 52/2025 dated 18.04.2025 on the file of Chirala ll Town P.S., Bapatla Djstrict[ The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the memorandum `of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI PAVAN KUMAR PASUPULETI Advocate for the Petitioner, and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent, and the Court made the following ORDER: -i.--_ -._. h -A- APHCOI O277522025 :=EhiE: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5726/2025 Between : Chidaraboina Srinu AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. PAVAN KUMAR PASUPULETI Counsel for the Respo.ndent/comp]ainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court macle the following: [3521I .HPETITIONER/ACCUSED ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya N'agarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity €the BNSS'), seeking for graht of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/A.2 in FIR No.52 of 2025, on the file of Chirala ll Town Police Station, Bapatla, registered for the offences punishable under Section 78,137(2), 351(2) read with 3(5),137(2) r/w 49 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity fthe BNS]) and Section 12 of POCSO Act, 2012- 2. The case of the prosecution is thatthe accused No.1 and oth:r accused I a,+ including petitioner have kidnapped the c/efacfo complainant aged about 17 years for the purpose of marriage. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 4. Sri Pavan Kumar Pasupuleti, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence, even on the face of the bare averments in the statement of the victim girl. The petitioner was falsely implicated in the case for various reasons, including pressure exerted on him to part with some money to the defacfo complainant. The defacfo complainant is not aged about 17 years, as contended by her in her statement before the police. The correct age and date of birth, as per the Study-Gum-Conduct Certificate issued by the Head Master of ZiIIa Parishad High School, Kothapeta, Vetapalem, is ` i I 25.06.2005. The provisions of the POCSO Act' are not applicable in this y case, as she was about 19 years old at the time of the alleged offence. The petitioner is pursuing a law course, and he would abide by any conditions to be imposed on him by this Court. He has a fixed abode and urged the Court to enlarge him on pre-a`rrest bail. 5. Per contra, Sri NeelotphaI Ganji, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, submits that the age of the defacto complainant is 17 years L"-"ur as per -the birth certificat ihdee it is mentioned that the defacto i.` / complainantwas born on 26.05.2007, It is fairly noted that A.1 and A.3 have already been enlarged On bail. The statement of the defacfo complainant has already been recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal procedure code, 1973 (for brevity, lCrPCI), by the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Chirala, and requested the Court to dispose of the petition appropriately. 6, As seen from the statement of the Victim, there iS nO specific overt act alleged against the petI'tiOner indicating that he had I-ndulged l'n the commission of the alleged offence. There is a strong dispute regarding the date of birth of the victI|m, Whether She iS aged about 17 years oar 19 years. In the birth certificate Of the defaCfo COmPlainant, her date Of birth is mentioned as 26.05.2007, whereas in the Study-Gum-Conduct Certificate, her date of birth is recorded as 26.05.2005. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the defaCfo COmPlainant has already married another man on 22.05.2025. To that effect, a photocopy evidencing the marriage of the defacfo complainant with another person,-tr has been filed. 7. Taking into consideration the en{l-re gamut of the case, the role and , complexity of the petitionerJs involvement, and the nature of the allegations levelled against him, this Court inclines to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner with stringent conditions. `\ 8, ln the result, this criminal petition is allowed with the fOllOWing directions: a) ln the event of arrest of theJIPetitiOner, the Petitioner Shall be enlarged on bail On executing a Personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police offI'Cia]S; b) The petitioner shall make themselves available for 'lnvestigation as and when required; c) The petitioner shall not cause any threat, inducement or promI-Se tO the prosecution witnesses; d) The petitl'oner shall appear before the station House Officer concerned once in a week i.e., on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet. e) The petitioner shall not leave the district limits without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned, SD/- G ASSJSTA hl ANAIDU GISTRAR //TRUE COPY// FFICER ForAOOl-[Jr`... ___ To] 1. The Station House Officer, Chirala ll Town P.S., Bapatla District. 2. The Special Court for Speedy Trial of Offences under POCSO Act, ongo[e, Prakasam District. 3. One CC to SRl. PAVAN KUMAR PASUPULETl, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 5. One spare copy KN HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED :25/06/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.5726 of 2025 ALLOWED