[3521] lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE : PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RA`®^t*S*\` CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6972 OF 2025 * t`>c Between: 1. Sri Yenduluri Venkata Dileep Kumar, S/o. Mastanrao, aged about 25 years, R/o. D. No. 2-246, Lingamgunt'la V'lllage, Peddakurapadu Mandal, Palanadu District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. Sri Kancharla Adarsh Babu, S/o. Venkata Narayana, Aged about 23 years, R/o. 9-41, Bus Stand Centre, Tadikonda Town and MandaI, Guntur District. petitioners/Accused NO.16 & 19 AND 1. State of Andhra Pradesh, (SHO, Cyber Crime Police Station, visakhapatnam comissionerate), rep. by its public Prosecutor High court of Andhra Pradesh Buildings, At Amaravati Respondent/Complainant petition under section 480 & 483 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased tO enlarge the Petitioners/Accused Nos.16 & 19 on Bail in connection with Crime No.53 of 2025 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Visakhapatnam. i couNSEL FOR PETITIONER:Sri K. Sai Ram Murthy. couNSEL FOR RESPONDENT: Public Prosecutor, The Court made the following + DR.YLR,J 'is CRLP.NO.6972/2025 The Court made the following ORDER: The criminal petitI'On has been filed under sections 480 and 483 of "BharatI|ya Nagarik Suraksha sanhl-ta, 2023" (for brevity fthe BNSS'), seeking to enlarge the petitioners on hal-I jn cr. No.162 of 2024 of Maharanjpeta poll-Ce station, vjsakhapatnam commI|SSjOnerate registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 194 of fthe BNSS'. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on o7.12.2025, the de-facto complaI'nant received a WhatsApp call from mobile number +639510912260 and the person spoke in EngII'Sh and Hindi language that, her husband taken Rs.2000/- loan through online app and sent few obscene morphed photos of her and her husband. on that, the de-facto complainant paid an amount of Rs.2,000/I through Phone Pe to the sat-d mObI'Ie number. Further, she gone to duty at sI'mhadri HospI'taI, later, while she was present at the Hospital, her eJ{]` brother-I-n-law contactlher over phone and l'nformed that, her husband died r due to hangI-ng himself With a saree I-n their room. on that information, the de- facto complajnant I-mmediately rushed to her house at about 20:00 hours and broke open the doors and shifted her husband to KG HospI-taI, Visakhapatnam and the doctors informed that her husband was brought dead. Hence, a case Was registered. 3. Heard learned counsel for{he petitI'Oner and the learned Assistant publl-c Prosecutor. perused the record. ¢ ``-,`===-_ . DR.YLRIJ CRLP.NO.6972/2O25 4. Sri K. Sairam Murthy, learned counsel for the Petitioners Submits that the petitioners are sole bread winners of their family, The petitioners have not committed any offence and they were falsely implicated 'ln this case. The pet-ItiOnerS WOuld abide by any condition tO be imposed by th-lS Court. 5. Perconfra, Ms. P. Akila Na'ldu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that the petitioners are habitual 'offenders, some more mater-lal witnesses have to be examined|, investigation is not completed; 'lf the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they would not be available for the investigation and they would escape from the clutches of law; and urged to d®lsmiss the bail petit'lon. 6. As seen from the record, the Petitioners Were arrested On 25.03.2O25 that is about 112 days ago from this day. enffiaEB. However, the Petitioners > were sent to judicial custody on 10.04.2025 that is 96 days from this day. The allegation against the pet-ltioners is that they had indulged in online transaction of the money by luring or cheating the gullible public and extorted money from them by resorting var-Ious methods includ'lng morphing of photos with obscene photos. The Investigating Officer has not filed Charge Sheet in this Case. The petitioners, as observed supra, have been in the judicial custody for the past 96 days. This Court in Cr!.P.No.5755 of 2025 on 25,06.2025, enlarged the Accused Mos.14 and 15 on bail and the learned Single Judge of th'ls Court in crl.p.No.4355 of 2025, enlarged the Accused No.6 on bail and th®lS Court in crl.p.No.5475 of 2025 on 29.05.2025, enlarged the Accused No.12 on bail. `.--s~ 4 DR.YLR,J CRLP.NO.6972/2025 considerl'ng the nature of the allegations levelled against the petI'tiOnerS, their alleged role played in this case, stage of the I-nvestigation and the perI[Od Of detention they have been undergoing, this court deems it fit to enlarge the petjtjoners on ba" wl|th the following stringent condjtI'OnS.I lV. V.I Vl. The petitl-oners/Accused Nos.16 and 19 shall be enlarged on bail subject {o them executing bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), with two sure[jes each for the lI[ke sum leach to the satisfaction of the learned chief Judicial Magistrate, vl-sakhapatnam. The pet['tI-Oners/Accused Nos.16 and 19 shall appear before the station House officer, Maharanipeta police statI'On, visakhapatnam commjssjonerate, on every saturday I-n between 10:00 am and o5:00 pm, tI'll cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. The petI-tiOnerS/Accused Nos.16 and 19 sha" not leave the I!'mjts of the District wl'thout prior permission from the learned Chief Judl'cI-al Magistrate, visakhapatnam. The petitioners/Accused Nos.16 and 19 shall not commit or I-ndulge in commI'SSiOn Of any offence l'n future. The petjtjoners/Accused Nos.16 and 19 shall cooperate with the jnvestigatjng officer l'n further investigatI-On Of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. The petj{ioners/Accused Mos.16 and 19 sha" not, directly or indirectly, make any I-nduCement, threat or promise to any person acquaI|nted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from d['sclosing such facts to the court or to any po[jce officer. I.,/ c- .,r 5 DR.YLR,J CRLP. NO.6972/2025 vii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.16 and 19 shall surrender their passports, if any, to the investigating officer. lf they claim that they do not have a passport, they shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. SD/-G.HELANAIDU zriz=riTRAR ASSISTANT //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Visakhapatnam. 3. The Station House Officer, Maharanipeta Police Station, VisaKHAPATNAM Commissionerate. 4. The Station House Officer, Cyber Crime Police Station, Visakhapatnam Comissionerate. 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor High Court ofAndhra Pradesh, At Amaravati (OUT) 6. One CC to Sri K. Sairam Murthy Advocate [OPUC] 7. One spare copy KSV HIGH COURT DR.YLRJ DATE: 18-07-2025 ORDER CRLP.No.6972 of 2025 I' ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION