IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE iPRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO I CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7014 OF 2025 Between: 1. Paleti Madan Mohan, s/o Rama Rao, aged about 41 years. Railway near Anjaneswami Temple, employee, R/o D.No.57-1-18/55, Santhapeta, Ongole city, Prakasam District. 2. Yericharla Srinivasa Rao, s/o Paddaiah, aged about 46 years, painter, r/o D.No.57-1-18/55, Near Anjaneswami Temple, Santhapeta, Ongole city, Prakasam District. 3. Yeduri Narendra Babu, s/o Ramanaiah, aged about 39 years, SBI employee, r/o D.No.57-1-29/30, Santhapeta, Ongole city, Prakasam District. Near Anjaneswami Temple Petitioner/Accused AND The State of A.P., rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District, Through Station House Officer, Ongole II Town Police Station, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh. Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 482 of BNSS., is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners herein connection with Crime No. 57/2025, dated 12.05.2025, registered at Ongole II Town Police Station, Prakasam District, wherein they face allegations of offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 118(1) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. They humbly request a direction to the Station House Officer of Ongole 11 Town Police Station, Prakasam District to release them on bail in the event of their arrest, pending disposal of the case, subject to reasonableconditionsto the satisfactionof the Court. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Advocate for the Petitioners and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, for the Respondent; The Court made the following ORDER: 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7014 of 2025 Dated 06.08.2025 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: \ The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the petitioners/Accused for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.57 of 2025 of Ongole II Town Police Station, Prakasam District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 109 (1), 115 (2), 118 (1) read with 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’) 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.05.2025 at about 19:30 hours at Santhapet, Ongole Town, the complainant was assaulted by A- 1 and his associates A-2 and A-3. The incident was reported on 12.05.2025 at 09:00 hours through fiospital intimation. The complainant stated that A-1, who is the uncle of Paleti Suvarna Babu and works at the Railway Co-operative Bank, Ongole, bore a grudge over a house construction dispute near the Railway Quarters, Ongole. While the complainant and his friend Chandolu Suneei Kumar were sitting near the construction site, the accused approached them and picked a quarrel. During the altercation,^.A-2 and A-3 caught hold of Suneei, while A-1 3 Dr. YLR, J Grip.No.7014 of 2025 Dated 06.08.2025 stabbed him on the right elbow with a knife and beat him with a stick causing head injuries and bleeding. All three accused then assaulted both the complainant and Suneel with hands and legs, threatened them, and fled the scene. A case was registered based on the complaint, and the injured were shifted to the Government General Hospital, Ongole, for treatment. 3. Sri Jada Sravan Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioners, contends that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence and have been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioners are the sole earning members of the family. Petitioner No.1 is a Railway employee. Petitioner No.3 is an employee of the State Bank of India. Ail the petitioners have got fixed abode and they would not flee away from the clutches of law. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that Petitioner No.1 also suffered severe injuries and he was taken to hospital. The doctor certified that there are head injuries and also lacerated injuries on the body of Petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.1 also lodged a report, which was registered as Cr.No.58 of 2025 of Ongole II Town Police Station. As the de-facto complainant occupied illegally public road. Petitioner No.1 filed Writ Petition i.e., W.P.No.22854 of 2024 against the de-facto complainant and also the Municipal 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7014 of 2025 Dated 06.08.2025 Corporation concerned, that became a root cause of the alleged attack. As it is a case and counter where the petitioners also suffered some injuries, the learned counsel for the petitioners urges this Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. 4. Per contra, Mr. Neelotphal Ganji, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioners are released on pre-arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor further submits that in the hands of the petitioner No.1, L.W.1 suffered grievous injuries, L.W.2 suffered simple injuries. There is an independent eyewitness, i.e., L.W.3, who spoke in his statement against the petitioners. As there are specifc overt acts attributed against the petitioners by the de-facto complainant and other witnesses, grant of pre-arrest bail in favor of the petitioners may not be considered and urged to dismiss the petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7014 of2025 Dated 06.08.2025 course, there are specific overt acts attributed against the Petitioner No.l Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 held the de-facto complainant, and Petitioner No.1 allegedly assaulted him with a knife. 6. On perusal of the record, of 7. Be that as it may, the Petitioner No.1 lodged a report against the de- facto complainant, which was registered as a case in Or.No.58 of 2025. Thus, it is a case and counter-case. 8. As seen from the medical record, the Petitioner No.1 also suffered severe head injuries and lacerated injuries over his ears. The Petitioner No.1 is an employee of Indian Railways, and Petitioner No.3 i employee of the State Bank of India. Writ Petition No.22854 of 2024 filed by Petitioner No.1 against the de-facto complainant, alleging that he had illegally occupied the public road and was creating nuisance to the general public. Perhaps, that became the root cause of the skirmish between the petitioners and the de-facto complainant. IS an was 9. Considering the gravity and nature of the allegations leveled against the petitioners, the alleged role played by them in this case, their avocation, the case and counter registered against the petitioners and the de-facto complainant, and the fact that Petitioner No.1 has also suffered severe head injuries, and as the police at this juncture are not in 6 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7014 of2025 Dated 06.08.2025 a position to determine who are the actual aggressors, this Court deems it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. In the event of their arrest, the petitioners/Accused shall be enlarged on bail subject to they executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only), each with two sureties for the like each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; ii. The petitioners/Accused shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required; The petitioners/Accused shall threat, inducement witnesses; sum Ilf. not cause any promise to the prosecution or The petitioners/Accused shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned once in a week i.e. every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet. IV. , on 7 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7014 of2025 Dated 06.08.2025 The petitioners/Accused shall not leave the district V. limits without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. vii. The petitioners/Accused shall surrender their passports, if any, to the investigating off'cer. If they claim that they do not have passport, they shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. SDI- G.HELANAIDU ASSISTANT RMSTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Ongole II Town Police Station, Prakasam 1. The Station House Officer District. 2. One CC to Sri. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravati. [OUT] 4. One spare copy JSS HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED:06/08/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.7014 of 2025 ALLOWED