quxp".`. lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: i( THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO l`,,` \ CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5755 OF 2025 Betwee n : 1. Gundeboina sambasiva Rao, S/o. Late Hanumaiah, aged about 32 years, R/o.FIat No.86, Road No.4, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy District, N/o. D.No.1-151, Gannavaram (v), Khambampadu, Macherla Mandal, palanadu District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. Pelapudi Jeevan SaI-, S/o. Venkateswarlu, Aged about 28 years, R/o. 1- 90-156, Housl-ng Board Colony, Ml-ryalaguda, Nalgonda District, N/o. Block NO.41 P, AvanthI|nagar, Yerragadda, Hyderabad. ...PetI-tiOner/AccusecI No.14 & 18 AND The State of AP, (SHO, Cyber Crime Police Station, Visakhapatnam ComissI'Onerate), rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Buildings, At Amaravati. ...Respondent/complainant petition under SectI-On 480 & 483 of BNSS is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds fI'Ied in support of the criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the PetitI'OnerS/Accused Nos.14 & 18 on Bail I'n COnneCtl'On With CrI'me No.53 of 2025 of Cyber Crime Poll-Ce Station, Visakhapatnam. The petition comI'ng On for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI K SAIRAM MURTHY Advocate for the petitionerj^ and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR fort the Respondent, and the court made the following ORDER: a 9 er *` fr` WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT` THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO cRIM[NAL PETITION -NO: 5755/2025 [3521] Between : Gundeboina Sambasiva Rao and Another .HPETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State OfAp , Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): K SAIRAM MURTHY H.RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 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 petitioners/Accused Nos.14 and 18 on bail in I cr.No.53 of 2025 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Visakhapatnam-City, registered against the petitioners/Accused Nos.14 & 18 herein for the ojfeLnL£eJ± Punishable under Sections 108, 308(2), 319(2), 318(4), 79, 351 (2) E= \--- - i-i--I+ a / Dr.YLR,. crl. p.No.5755 of 2025.bae Dated 25.06.2025 ) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for brevity tthe BNSl) and Section 66-C, 66-D and 67-A of lnfOrmat®lOn Technology Act, 2000 (for brevity {the lT Act'). 2. The case Of the Prosecution in nutshell iS that, One Surada Akhi[a Devi (hereinafter Called aS 'de-faCtO COmPIainanO 'ls resident Of MaharaniPeta, VisakhaPatnam City, iS the Wife Of One Surada Narendra (hereinafter called as £deceased]). The lde-facto COmPlalnant' iS doing housekeeping work in simhadri Hospital. The £deCeaSed' had taken loan for an amount of Rs.2,000/- from Online aPP, Subsequently he COuld not repay and that on o7.12.2024, he received WhatsaPP Call from the Mobile I No.+639510912260 informing that the {deCeaSed' had taken loan for Rs.2,000/- and also Sent some Obscene mOrPhed Photographs Of the tde- facto complainant' and [deceased7, then the tde-faCtO COmPlainant] Paid Rs.2,000/- through PhonePe tO the Mobile No.+639510912260. The tde-facto complainant7 as usual Went tO Hospital tO attend her duty. on o7.12.2024 she received the Phone Call from her brother-in-law stating that the £deceased' died due to hang'lng with saree in their I room. Immediately the [deceased' was shifted to K.G.Hospital, visakhapatnam, where the doctors stated that he was brought dead. 3. Sri K.Sai Rama Murthy, the learned COunSel for the Pet-lt',OnerS submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence', the petitioners were falsely implicated by the pol-Ice in the crime', the p3titioners are the t;fFZa# L--. \1 .ap I + J Dr.YLR,J CrI.P.No.5755 of 2O25 Dated 25.06.2025 ds #` fo` sole breadwinners of their family; the petitioners would abide by any I conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to allow the petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the Accused Nos.6, 12 and Accused No.53 were already enlarged on bail by this Court. 5. Per confra, Mr. Neelotphal Ganji, the learned Assistant Public prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that the petitioners are habitual offenders, some more material witnesses have to be examined; .investigation is not completed; if the petitioners a.re enlarged on bail, they would not be available for the investigation and would escape from the I clutches of law; and urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. As seen from the record, the petitioners have been in the judicial custody since 27.03.2025 i.e-., more than 75 days. If the petitioners are enlarged on bail with stringent conditions, they would not flee away from the clutches of the law, ave fixed abode and interest of the justice would be served. 7. Keeping in view of the period Of detention undergone by the petitioners in judicial custody for more than 75 days, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the petitioners,I and their alleged role in the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail with the following stringent cond'ltions. + - i- Q~.-) l` * Dr_ i Cri-P:No.575-5.6; Dated 25.O6. 8. ln the result, the criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions.- i. The petitioners/A-14 & A-18 shall be enlarged on bail subject to them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), each with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfactl'on of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. ill. The petitioners/A-14 & A-18 shall appear before the Station House Officer, Cyber Crime Police Station, Visakhapatnam City, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, tI'll COgniZanCe iS taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petI'tl'OnerS/A-14 & A-18 shall not leave the limits of the DI'StriCt Without Prior PermI'SSiOn from the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, iv. The petitioners/A-14 & A-18 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. I v, The petitioners/A-14 & A-18 shall cooperate with the l'nvestigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. l'1^ _\ I_>\+±* • r=z,I.i-us-. Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5755 of 2025 Dated 25.06.2025 vi. The petitioners/A-14 & A-18 shall not, dI-reCtly Or indirectly, make any I|nduCement, threat or promise to any Person acquainted wI|th the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police l officer. SD/-G.I ASSISTANll //TRUE COPY// SE IAIDU STRAR ION OFFICER I To, 1. The Station House Officer, Cyber CrI'me Police Station, Vl'sakhapatnam Comissionerate, visakhapatnam District. 2. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam Distrl-ct. 3. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Visakhapatnam. 4. One CC to SRI. K SAIRAM MURTHY, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 6I One spare copy KN DR.YLR,J DATED : 25/06/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.5755 of 2025 ALLOWED |\ .I.`:i \\._.ht,-.i l