APHC010338732025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7026/2025 Between: Mude Paramesh Naik and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. SHAIK MEERAVALI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’)by the petitioners/A2 and A3 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.102 of 2025 of Prohibition and Excise Station, Dharmavaram, Sri Satya Sai District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 7(A) r/w 8(e) of Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995. 2 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 28.05.2025 at about 4:30 p.m., acting on the instructions of the District Prohibition and Excise Officer, Puttaparthy, and under the supervision of the Prohibition and Excise Inspector, Enforcement Wing, Anantapuramu, the Prohibition & Excise Officer, Dharmavaram, along with staff and mediators, conducted a raid at Nallagutta, located approximately 15 kilometers northwest of Guddampalli Thanda Village, Mudigubba Mandal. During the raid, they spotted three male individuals with plastic containers. Upon seeing the officials, the individuals abandoned the containers and fled the scene. However, the Village Revenue Assistant (V.R.A.) identified them and called out their respective names. On hearing their names, the individuals briefly turned back and then fled again.Following the instructions of the Prohibition & Excise Inspector, Dharmavaram, the Prohibition & Excise Sub-Inspector, Dharmavaram attempted to apprehend them but was unsuccessful. 3. Subsequently, the Prohibition & Excise Sub-Inspector, along with the mediators, searched the premises and found 10 plastic vessels, each with a 10-liter capacity, filled with fermented jaggery wash (F.J. wash), and one white plastic can with a capacity of 20 liters. Upon inquiry, the V.R.A. provided the identity details of the escaped individuals. The Prohibition & Excise Sub- Inspector verified the seized property in the presence of mediators and confirmed that the 10 vessels contained a total of 100 liters of F.J. wash, and the can contained approximately 15 liters of illicitly distilled (ID) liquor.The Prohibition & Excise Sub-Inspector drew three sample bottles of 650 ml 3 capacity, each filled with 400 ml of F.J. wash, and one 180 ml sample bottle of ID liquor for chemical analysis. The remaining quantity of ID liquor was seized, and since it was not feasible to transport the entire quantity of F.J. wash to the Excise Station, it was destroyed at the spot. A Panchanama was drafted at the scene regarding the possession of F.J. wash and ID liquor. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. Sri Shaik Meeravali, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence; they were falsely implicated in this case; they are the sole breadwinners of their families; they are ready to abide any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to grant pre- arrest bail to the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3. 6. Per contra, Sri Neelothpal Ganji, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that investigation is not yet completed; if the petitioners are granted pre-arrest bail, they will repeat the same offence, and it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 7. As per the mediators’ report dated 28.05.2025, recorded at about 4:35 p.m., the petitioners/accused Nos. 2 and 3 were allegedly seen fleeing from the scene of offence, and the de facto complainant/V.R.A., from a distance, identified them and provided their identity particulars to the Prohibition & Excise Sub-Inspector. Based on this information, the Prohibition and Excise Sub-Inspector drafted the mediators’ report. 4 8. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are no adverse antecedents against the petitioners. The petitioners contend that they have been falsely implicated in the case due to local political rivalries at the instance of the political leaders. 9. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations leveled against the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 and their alleged roles attributed to them, this Court deems it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3, subject to the following stringent conditions: a) In the event of arrest of the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3, the petitioners/accused Nos. 2 and 3 shall be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) each with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; b) The petitioners shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required; c) The petitioners shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; d) The petitioners shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned once in a week i.e., on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet. e) The petitioners shall not leave the district limits without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. f) The petitioners shall surrender their passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If they claims that they does not have a 5 passport, they shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 29.07.2025 S D P 6 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.7026 of 2025 Date:29.07.2025 S D P