IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE .ed :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7038 OF 2025 Between : vi"tis`is`;_I.;l'.`{,~ 1. Boya Muniswamy, Aged about 36 years, S/o. Pedda Bazari, R/o. H. No. 4/298, Pulakurthi Village, Kodumur MandaI, KurnooI DistrI|Ct. 2. Boya Pedda Shiva, Aged about 25 years, S/o. Pedda Bazarll, R/o. H. No. 4/298, Pulakurthi village, Kodumur Mandal, Kurnool District. 3. Boya Pedda Bazari, Aged about 52 years, S/o. Late Chinna Bodenna, R/o. H. No. 4/298, Pulakurthi Village, Kodumur MandaI, KurnooI District. 4. Boya Rakesh, Aged about 25 years, S/o. Boya Ranganna, R/o. H. No. 4-243, Pulakurthi Village, Kodumur Mandal, KurnooI District. 5. Boya Suresh, Aged about 24 years, S/o. Hanumanth @ Jinnu, R/o. H. No.1-182, Pulakurthi Village, Kodumur MandaI, Kurnool District. 6. Kallapari Naidu @ Boya Veera Bhadra Naidu, Aged about 25 years, S/o. Somappa, R/o. H. No. 5-159, Pulakurthi Village, Kodumur MaindaI, KurnooI District, 7. Boya Nagaraju @ Boya Kotisani, Aged about 22 years, S/o. Boya Kanigiri @ Katigadu, R/o. Pulakurthi Village, Kodumur MandaI, KumooI DI-Strict. 8. Boya Thimmappa, Aged about 25 years, S/o. Boya Ranganna @ Boya Sodala Ranganna, R/o. H. No. 1-126, Pulakurthi Village, Kodumur MandaI, KurnooI DistrI-Ct. Petitioners/Al to A8 AND State of Andhra Pradesh, through station House Officer, Kodumur Police Station, rep. by public prosecutor, High Court at Amaravati. Respondent Petition under section 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C/480 & 483 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 release the petitioners/Al to A8 on Regular Bail in the connection with crime no. 81 of 2025 dt. 27104.2025 registered before Kodumur Police Station, Kurnool District. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri. p NARASIMHULU Advocate for the petitioners and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent; tw,-<rs9`,*/--J-A. ---- . .- APHCO10339672025 EELE IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITi'ON NO: 7038/2025_ Between : Boya Muniswamy, and Others AND State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(s): 1,P NARASIMHULU [3521] .HPETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) ".RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Responclent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (for brevity fthe Cr.P.C.I) SectI-OnS 480 and 483 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha SanhI-ta, 2023 (for brevity tthe BNSSJ), seeking to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 8 on bail in CrI'me No.81 \-rfu l .-`¥ ``^-ae=--_-.I of 2025 of Kodumur Police Station, Kurnool District, registered for the OffenCeS punishable under sect'lons 189(3),191(2),191(3),103(1),109,115(2),118(1), 351 (2) read with 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short [the BNS). 2. The case of the Prosecution, in a nutshell, iS that On 27.04.2025, the defacto complainant filed a report before the police stating that he, along With his family members and other village elders, Were going tO the accused tO settle the problem of his cousin suresh. Al to A8 and some Others Were holding sticks and rods and came towards the defacto complainant and others and showed their hands at them, threatened, attacked and beat them. Al beat the defacto complainant with a stick on h-ls head and caused bleeding injury. A2 beat the defaCtO COmPlainant W'Ith an iron rod and Caused bleeding injury on the left arm. when the cousin of the defacto complainant intervened, the accused also beat him and caused bleeding injury On his head, and dumb injury on his left arm, and they also beat the uncle of the defactO COmPlainant and caused bleeding injury on his head. 3. Heard the learned COunSel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant public prosecutor for the respondent/state. perused the material on record. 4. Sr-I Narasimhulu Parise, the learned COunSel for the Petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 8, submits that the Petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 8 had not committed ttse-=` tJ utJ any offence and they were falsely implicated I-n thl'S Case. The petitioners are sole bread winners of their family and they were arrested on o1.05.2025. Since then, they have been in judicial custody. Hence, he prays that the petitioners be enlarged on bail. 5. Perconfra, Ms. P. Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant PublI'C Prosecutor, opposed in gr`anting of bail stating thatihe investigation is not completed,I if 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 dismiss the bail petj{ion. 6. The allegation of the prosecution is that the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 8, along with other accused, formed an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons and attacked L.Ws.1 to 3. Subsequently, L.W.1 succumbed to injuries at his residence, and L.Ws.2 and 3 sustaI-ned inJ-urI'eS. The wound certificates are yet to be received. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that accused Nos.9 to ll were granted bail by the learned trial Court. The learned Assistant Public prosecutor submits that since their names were not reflected in the FIR, they were enlarged on bail. Furthermore, a learned single Judge of thI'S Court, in \=-- '_a Crl.P.No.5482 of 2025, granted anticipatory baI-I to accused No.12 on the L- \ ground that he was implicated solely based on the confession of accused No.1. The petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 8 were arrested on 01.O5.2025 and have been in judicial custody for the past 87 days. 8. As seen from the FIR and statements of witnesses, there are specific overt acts attributed to accused Nos.1 and 2. The investigation is still pending, and only 10 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. one person has died, and two others have sustained injuries in the incident. The nature and gravity of the injuries to the two injured witnesses are yet to be confirmed by medical evidence. 9. In view of the specific overt acts attributed to petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2, considering the gravity of the offence and the stage of investigation, this Court finds that it is not a fit case {o grant bail at this juncture. Accordingly, the petition as against petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 is dismissed. 10. However, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations against petitioner Nos.3 to 8/accused Nos.3 to 8, their alleged role in the offence, and the period of detention already they have undergone in the judicial custody for -'T \=} .__S * .itirnd , HLr *a the past 87 days, this Court is inclined to enlarge petitioner Nos.3 to 8/accused Nos.3 to 8 on bail. ll. ln the result, the criminal petition iS Partly allowed dismissing the petition against the petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 while granting bail to petitioner Nos.3 to 8/accused Nos.3 to 8, with the following 1 stringent conditions: i. , The petitioner Nos.3 to 8/Accused Nos.3 to 8 shall be enlarged on bail subject to they executing a bond for a Sum Of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfact|lon of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Kurnool. ii. The petitioner Nos.3 to 8/Accused Nos.3 to 8 shall appear before the Station House Officer, Kodumur Police Station, Kurnool District, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner Nos.3 to 8/Accused Nos.3 to 8 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh, without prior permission from the Investigating Officer. iv. The petitioner Nos.3 to 8/Accused Nos.3 to 8 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any' offence in future. v. The petitioner Nos.3 to 8/Accused Nos.3 to 8 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of if ____ _rty _ _ i;I I,{ li ` a the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The petitioner Nos.3 to 8/Accused Nos.3 to 8 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. SD/-G.HELANAIDUI //TRUE COPY// ASS:SET#::cTERRfR To, 1. The I Add-ltiOnal SesslOnS Judge, KurnoOl. 2 The Judicial Maglstrate Of Flrst Class, Speclal Moblle Court, KurnoOl 3. The Superintendent, DistrlCt Jail, KurnOOI District. 4 The Statlon House Offlcer, Kodumur Pollce StatlOn, KurnOOI DistrlCt 5. One CC to Sri. P NARASIMHULU, Advocate [OPUC1 6 Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court Of Andhra PradeSh, AmaraVati. [OUT] 7. One spare COPY JSS -___--D HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED : 28/07/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.7038 of 2025 PARTLY ALLOWED L- \