I IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANE}Hg¥A PRADESH AT AMAR TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JuS"CE Y. LAKSHMANA CRIMINAL PETI"®EN NO: 5850 OF 2025 Between.I p.v.veera Badra Rao, S/o. P. Annam Raju, Aged about 62 Years, RetI'red Manager, R/o. 20-298-4, BrahmapuFTam, Chi]akalapudj post,MachI'[I-Patnam. ( Presently stayI-ng at Hyderabaci) \' <_I ....PetitI-Oner/A1. ; L'AIREE9 I state ofAndhra pradesh, Rep by its special public prosecutor,CID, High court Buildings Amarayathi Through clD PS,AP, Mangalag]-r[-Guntur District ... Respondent. petjtjon under section 480 a E€t83 of BNSS is filed, praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to release the petjtI-Oner/Accused no.1 on regular baI'I involved I-n the in Crime No.25/24 State S.H.O., CID PS AP, MANGALAGIRI for the alleged offehces under sec.420, 409 468, 471, r/w.120 (B) of I.P.C AND Sec.13(2) of P.C. AbT','<l1988. The petjtjon coming on for hearirig, upon perusing the petition and the affldavI-I filed in support thereof ant_i l~!pon hearl-ng the arguments of sR! VENKATA KAMALAKANTH NADlfidiPALLI Advocate for the petI-tiOner, Assistant publI-C Prosecutor for the fstJ`;r,ondent, the Court made the following. ORDER ? TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5850/2025 Between : P.v.veera Badra Rao, AND State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: ".PETITIONER/ACCUSED ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT VENKATA KAMALAKANTH NADIMPALLI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity [the Cr.P.C')/ Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity fthe BNSSJ), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accus'ed No.1 on bail in cr.No.25 of 2024 of CID Police Station, A.P., Mangalagiri, registered against the petitioner/Accused No.1 herein for th; offences car / i a=-. I ._s, lS=_--_---i---a t_ i t 2 crl.p. No.5850D:|fY2LoR2j @\ Dated24.O6.2025 punishable under Sections 420, 409, 468, 471 read with 120(B) of {the IPC', and Section 13 (2) of the PreventI-On and Corruption Act,1988. 2. The case of the prosecutl'on is that the petitioner and other accused, who are officials of the Union Bank of India, colluded with Ms. Nadendla Sarala, Community Organizer, MEPMA, to sanction and d.isburse nearly 80 self-help group loan' facilities from the Bank. The t loans were sanctioned and disbursed with malafide intention to defraud the Bank and to obtain wrongful gain, and consequently, they dishonestly misappropriated the Bank's money and cheated, thereby causing a huge loss to the Bank to the tune of eI'ght (08) crores. giv, fr 3. Sri. Venkata Kamalakanth Nadimpalli, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence; he tree ir was falsely implicated in this case by the Bank; he is sole l®l winner of his family; the petitioner is aged about 62 years and he retired as Chief Manager of Union Bank of India on 30.06.2023; FIR in this case was lodged on 21.10.2024 by the Bank officials; there was no reference incriminating the petitioner in the Audit Report; major portion of the investigation is completed; the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to enlarge the petitioner on bail. <-_i-J3n-n 3 Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.5850 of 2O25 Dated 24.06..2025 4.- Per confra, Mr, Neelo{phal Ganji, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed enlarging the petitioner on bail and stated that the investigation is not completed. He further said that the petitioner, with the help of other Bank officials, conspired to create and sanction loans to self-help groups, causlng a loss to the Bank to ®Tun¥of eight (o8) crores, and urged to dismiss the petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 6. Perused the record. 7. As seen from the record, in the remand report i{ is mentioned that officers did not extend their enquiry with regard to the collusion of the petitioner, who is figured as Accused No.1, with the other accused in creating fake accounts, diverting the amounts of union Bank of India, and misleading the funds of the Government of Andhra Pradesh into fake accounts, causing huge monetary loss to the Bank and also to the Government by the petitioner in collusion with the other accusecl. 8. The investigation reveals that as many as 28 witnesses have been examined by the Investigating Officer. ln this case, all the other accused were already enlarged on bail. The petitioner has been in judicial -`_-fi ¢`t-t `9 H Dr. yL_R, J crl.p.No.5850 of 2025 custody for the past 60 days The petl{loner JS retlred as chlef Manager Dated 24.06.2025 of unlon Bank of lndla The cr,me was reg[stered pursuan{ to h,s ref,'rement, that l's on 21.10.2024. I 9 'n vlew of the nature of the allegat,ons levelled agalnst the pe{ltloner, hIS alleged role played ln thIS Case, and the plea of detent,on ln JudICJal custody by the petJ{,oner, {hJS Court ls lncl,ned to enlarge the pet,tl'oner on bal-I wI'th some strl-ngent cond,'tlons 10 ln the result, the crlmlnal petltJOn JS allowed w,th the followlng COnditl'ons.- L The petl't,'oner/Accused No.1 sha" be enlarged on ba" +Ill.._ _ I supbject [o he executJ'ng a bond for a (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) wJ'th \ 'lke sum each to the sail-SfactI-On of sum of Rs.20,000/- two sureties for the the learned specl'al __ `,I/|_u[a Judge for SPE and ACE cases-cwm-Ill Addltlonal Dlstr,cf and sessI'Ons Judge, v,'J-ayawada. H The petJtIOner/Accused No 1 sha" appear before the l±nnv^esnt:g^a±:ng offlcer, on every sunday ln between-:::: L:: and o5 00 pm, tJ" I,llng of the charge sheet. Hl, The petltloner/Accused Nol sha" surrender hIS passport, Jf any, to the lnvestjgatI'ng Offlcer un" the I <_---. _~__ot",,p,,'fri~`ul`i9t*rItj7rdus"rIri},`"t 5 Dr.I YLR, J CrI.P.No.5850 of 2025 Dated_24.06.2025 conclusion of the trI-aI. If the petI'tiOner does not have a Passport, he shall submit an affidavit to the Investigating Officer to that effect, I'V. The petI|tiOner/Accused No.1 shall not threaten or I|nfluence the wI|tneSSeS. v. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investI'gatiOn Of the case and shall be available _to the investigating officer as and when called by hI-m. Sd/-G.HELA NAIDU a'\ ''.\ \'.-\ //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANTZ:TRAR SECTION OFFICEF` To, 1. The (Remand Court Ill AddI. D]c;tri6t & sessI'OnS Judge FOR STE & ACB CASES CUM Ill Additiohal District & Session Judge at Vijayawada. 2. The Superintendent, District Jail .at Vijayawada. 3. -The SHO, CID PS,AP, Mangalagiri, Guntur District (by RPAD) 4. One CC to SRl. VENKATA KAMALAKANTH NADIMPALLI Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two cos to SPL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court ofAndhra Pradesh.[OUT] 6. One spare copy ksr HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED :24/06/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.5850 of 2025 ALLOWED