.t{.,1.IT.I...#.I++I. [N THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AM ARAV TUESDAY ,THE ll^/ENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6827 OF 2025 Between : 1. Chimata Anjaneyulu, S/ o Tirupathaiah, aged 35 years, Occ Cultivation. 2. Sampathi Chinna Kotiswami, S/o Koteswara Rao, aged about 48 years, Occ Cultivation. 3. Chimata GovinduH S/o Gangaiah, aged 54 years, Occ Cultivation. 4. Chimata Yedukondaluu S/o Gangaiah, aged 52 years, Occ Cultivation. (All the petitioners are R/o Kesanupalli village, Narasaraopet Mandal, Palnadu District) ...petitioner/Accused No.1 to 4 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, SHO, Narasaraope{ Rural Police Station, Palnadu District, Rep. by its Public F'rosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh a{ Amaravati. ....RespondentlComplainant petition under section 480 &`;483 of BNSS, 2023 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 enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection+ with FIR No.94/2025, dated 21-04-2025 in Narasaraopet Rural Police station, Palnadu District, The petition/Appeal coming on for hearing, upon Perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri.Sasanka Bhuvanagiri Advocate for the Petitioners, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) and the Court made the following. ORDER -----,-- - - _ `-=P:£ey *` I.ORDER: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6827/2025 The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 -and 483' of the 'Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity {th®e BNSS')/ Sections I 437' and 439 of the Code of Criminal Proc`edure, -1973 (for brevity fthe cr.p.c.I), seeking to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 2 on regular bail I-n Cr.No.94 of 2025 of Narasaraopet Rural Police Station, Palnadu District, registered against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 herein` for the offence punishable under Sections 85, 103(1), read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity cthe BNS'). 2. The case of the prosecution is that prior to 4:00 a.m. on 21.04.2025,I at KesanupaIIi Village of Narasaraopet MandaI, an incident occurred which was I reported on the same day at 5:30 p.m. by the complainant, Marri Chinthaialh. i The deceased, Chimata Srilakshmi, wife of Anjaneyulu, was a resident of Kesanupalli Village and the only daughter of the complainant. The complainant had solemnized. her marriage with Accused No.1, Chimata Anjaneyulu, about 13 years ago, and the couple had two female and two male -children. For the past few years, Accused No.1 and his relatives Accused No.2 Sampathi Koti Swamy, Accused No.3 Chimata Govindu, and Accused No.4 Chimata Konda @ Yedukondalu had been harassing the deceased by suspecting her character-and had driven her out of the h,ouse approximately I three months ago. Around 15 days prior to the incident, while the deceased the accused had not changed their behavior. on the day of the Dr.YLR, ` rCrl.P.No.6827 of2025 Dated 22.07.2025 was residl|ng at her parental home, all the accused, accompanied by some village elders, came to the complalnan{Js house, held dlscusslons, and took ` .| the deceased back to KesanupaJII tO resume her marltal llfe wl'th Accused No 1 Subsequently, the compjalnant came to know through the deceased that incident, the complainan{ recel'ved a phon? call from the accused, jnforml.ng him that the deceased had consumed pestI-CI'de and that they had taken her to the hospital. upon hearing this, the complaI'nant, along with his relatIVeS, rushed to the deceasec!js house ]n Kesanupa!lI, Where they found her dead, with her body placed ln an aI'r-COndl-tl|oned box. They also notl-ced injuries on her face and bleedlng from her nose Based on these observat!ons, the complalnant susp+ec{ed that all the accused had murdered hl-s daughter. 3. Heard leamed counsel for the petl~tI-Oners and the leamed Assistant Public Prosecutor-. 4I S" Sasanka Bhuvanadf'rj, the learned counsel `for the pet,{loners, submlts that the petl'tjoners have not commltted any offence, they were falsely mpllcated I'n thls case, they are sole bread wlnners of thelr famliy, they are ready to abide any conditions to be imposed by this court,- and urged to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 5. per confra, Mr. Nee!otphaI Ganji, the learned Assl-slant public prosecutor, opposed I-rl grantI'ng Of ba" stating that accusation is well-founded,I ~,~-r~-~'--'~ ~`-m,_i.,,,,.-... .~| `` `` I I-/- '='~-~-_-,i`l^`...__-a-I--i- - ) A `#p 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.6827 of 2O25 Dated 22.07.2025 if the petitioners are granted bail, they will repeat the same Offence and urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. Perused the record. q` I 7. After a thorough 'lnvestigation, the Inspector of Police, Narasaraopet Rural Police Station, filed-a charge sheet Stating that Accused No.1 had beaten his wife (deceased) multiple times, caught hold of her hair, and repeatedly slammed her face-against a door latch, aS a result Of Which She sustained severe bleeding injuries on her face. Further, Accused No.1 allegedly placed a towel around her neck and applied force until She Was unable to breathe. The alleged intention of Accused No.1 appears to be =e4draJ±graVe. He is the mastermlnd and the Prime accused in this Case. 'Accused Nos.2 {o 4 / Petitioner Nos.2 to 4, who are the r'elatives of Accus?d No.'1, are alleged to have ass'lSted him in Causing the death Of the deceased. since the accusations against the petitioners are well-founded, the charge sheet has been filed, and the case is currently at the PRC (Preliminary Register Case) stage. There -is also an eyewitness tO the alleged incident, cited as L.W.8. 8. Cons-ldering the gravity of the allegations levelled against the Petitioner No.1/accused No.1, this Court does not deems it fit tO grant bail to him. Hence, the petitioner No.1/accused No.1 is dismissed. Considering the nature I of the allegations levelled against the petitioners Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.2 to =t\---------I 4 Dr.YLR, J * Crl.P.No.6827 of2O25 Dated 22.07.2025 4 and thelr alleged role played in the case, th1®S Court is inclined to enlarge the PetI'tiOner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Mos.2 to 4 on bail. 9. ThI'S Court is of the opinion that if certain stringent conditions are imposed on the petI-i,-OnerS for SeCurlng their presence before the learned Trial Court for trial, the interest ofJiuStiCe WOuld be met. 19. ln the result, the cnmjnal pet,'tjon IS Partly allowed with the foI[owjng conditions.- i. The petitl-oners/A-2 to A-4 shall be enlarged on bail subject to them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), each with two su<reties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional Civ" Judge (Junior DivisI-On), Narasaraopet. ji. The petitioners/A-2 to A-4 sha" not commit or indulge in similar offences in future. I iI-I-. The petI-tiOners/A-2 toA-4 shall cooperatewith the learned + _-- ` Trial Court in trial of the case. __._~ __ -_ .__ -1-.-,.-~giv'_ DE Sd/,- K.+A[A RAG !STRAR //TRUE COPY// I sE'CTION OFFICER _-------i:.==.-T] -`\-___ '/ To, 1. The I Additional Civil Judge ( Junior Division) Narasaraopet. 2. The 'Superintenden{, Sub Jail , Narasaraopet. \ 3. The Station House Officer, Narasaraopet Rural Police Station, Palnadu District, 4. One CC to Sri. Sasanka Bhuvanagiri Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court ofA.P., Amaravati [OUT]. 6. One spare copy E= H[GH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED..22/07/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.6827 of 2025 PARTLY ALLOWED