IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl TUESDAY ,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY # TWOTHOUSANDANDTWENTYFIVE Z :PRESENT: ... Tl±E HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6670 OF 2025 st Between : [3521 I Shaik Mohammed Arif, S/o. Shaik Shanvaz, Aged about 20 years,occStudent, R/o. D.No. 25-1-40, Ahammed Nagar, Hindupur Town, Sri Sathya Sai District. Petitioner/Accused AND The state of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.,byit€Public Prosecutor, High Court of A. P.Amaravathi. Respondent/Comp]ainant Petition under Section 482 of BNSS (438 of Cr.P.C.,) praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to di+ect release the petitioner on bail in the event of his Arrest in connection with Crime (FIR). No. 83 of 2024 on the file of Hindupur I Town Police Station, Sri Sa{hya Sai District, pending enquiry and tr'lal COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER : SRI| SHAIK MEERAVALI COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER EEEEEE] ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of criminal Procedure,1973 (for brevity tthe Cr.P.C.I)/ Sections 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhl'ta, 2023 (for brevity [the BNSS'), seeking to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/Accu-sed No.10 in Cr.No.83 of 2024 of I Town Police Station, Hindupur, Sri Sathya Sai District, registered against the petitioner/Accused No.10 herein and others for the offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 353, 332, 307 r/w 149 lPC and section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act (for brevity lPDPP Act,)- 2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 07.4.2024 at about 1.00 am, at Muslim burial ground, Hasnabad, Hindupur, Al to A22 along with some others formed into an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons, picked up a quarrel with Sabiulla, Hindupur Vice Chairman and some others due to questioning Al as to why his followers beat Athik Ahammad and at the instance of police personnel who are discharging duties at Masjid were intervened and tried to separate them. However the accused and others, who bore grudge against the police staff for earlier, remanding the accused No.1 in criminal case havI-ng intention tO eliminate the police personnel by uttering some words against the police and kicked the complainant and when he fell down, thrashed him indiscrimI'nately With sticks, throttle with legs to do awiay, caused hurt to deter them from ``\_ ''''.~ '\ £ discharge of his duty and when the other police personnel went in rescue of the complainant, with an intention to eliminate them, severely assaulted them by pulling their lathis from their hands. Later Al to A22 caused mischief to. the police jeep by breaking windshield. 3. Sri 'Shaik Meerava[i, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence; he was falsely implicated in this case; he is the sole bread winner of his family; he is ready to abide .any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. He further submitted that accused Nos.9 and 15 were granted regular bail by the learned [] Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hindupur vide orders in Crl.P.No.19 of 2025 dated 30.01.2025. 4. Per con£ra, Mr.Neelotphal Ganji, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that inves`tigation is not yet concluded; if the petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail, he will repeat the same offence and prays to dismiss the bail petition. 5. Perused the record. 6. As seen from the record, there is no specific overt acts against the petitioner. The petitioner is aged about 20 years and is a student. His name was not reflected in the F.I.R. There is no much progress in the investigation. Learned ll Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hindupur has dismissed the pre-arrest bail on 24.6.2025 filed by the petitioner. 7. In view of the nature of the allegations leveled against the petitioner and the gravity of the case, the alleged role played by the petitI'Oner and the fact that the petitioner beI'ng a 20 years old boy, studying, this court deems it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. 8. This Court is of the opinion that if certain stringent conditions are imposed on the petitioner for securing their presence before the learned Trial Court for trial, the interest of justice would be met. 9. ln the result, the Criminal Petition i`s allowed with the following conditions: i. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner/Accused No.10 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten Thousand only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; ii. The petitioner/Accused No.10 shall appear before the Investigation Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 10:00.am and 05.loo pm, until further orders. iii. The petitioner/Accused No.10 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the learned Trial Judge. iv. The petitioner/Accused No.10 shall not commit or indulge in similar offences I-n future. v. The petitioner/Accused No.10 shall cooperate wI'th the investigating officer in further investI'gatiOn Of the Case and shall be available to the -Investigating Officer aS and When called by him. J sD/-K. KASIRAO AC:,HAR! ASS!STAN REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// OFFICER Toll The StatlOn House OffLCer, HlnduPur I Town Pol`Ce StatlOn, S" Sathya pe9a=--a sat Distr-lot 2. OneCCto 3. TwoCCs\O sR`. SHAIK MEERAVALI Advocate LOPUCI psuR#cHpA%"o===3i, H\gh Court Of A P\Ou" I+ i 4. One SPare COPY i- HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED:15/07/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.6670 of 2025 ALLOWED