APHC010346802025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI V MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.7191 of 2025 Between: Reddy Santosh, S/o. Ramunaidu, Hindu, aged 32 years, Aadhaar No. 5056 3295 5026, residing in a house bearing Door No. 5-22, Pishini, Pathivadapalem, Srikakulam District, Andhra Pradesh State, Pincode- 532409. ...Petitioner/Accused N6.5 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Police, Cyber Police Station, Visakhapatnam District, Through Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. ...Respondent Petition under Section 482 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/ suspected Accused on Bail in the event of Arrest in Crime No.118 of 2025 Registered by the Cyber Police Station, Visakhapatnam District by granting Anticipatory Bail. Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri I V CH Prudhviraju Counsel for the Respondent : Public Prosecutor The Court made the following order: APHC010346802025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7191/2025 Between: REDDY SANTOSH, S/0. RAMUNAIDU, HINDU, AGED 32 YEARS, AADHAAR NO. 5056 3295 5026,RESIDING IN A HOUSE DOOR NO. 5-22, PISHINI, DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH STATEPIN CODE- 532409. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED BEARING PATHIVADAPALEM, SRIKAKULAM AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by Police, Cyber Station, Visakhapatnam District, Through Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. Police ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: I V CH PRUDHVIRAJU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Dr. YLR, j Crt.P.No.7191 of2025 Dated21.07.2025 ' The Court made the following: ORDER The Criminal Petition has been Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. the petitioner/Accused No. 5 for with Crime No. 118 of 2025 Visakhapatnam Commissionerate filed under Section 482 of the 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by granting of pre-arrest bail in connection on the file of Cyber Crime Police Station, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 112 (1) the Bhara 319 (2), 318 (4) read with 61 (2) of the BNS’). 66-C. 66-D of -2008, Sections 3 and 4 of tiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity the Information Technology Act-2000 the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act. 2. The case of the information. Inspector and his Apartments prosecution is that on 07.06.2025 staff conducted on credible a raid near Vensa Classic Srinivasanagar, Visakhapatnam. They apprehended individual, Simmala Surya Prakash one (A-3), who was found operating a to being years along applications like Radhe Exchange Four Android mobile phones mobile phone at the scene. Upon questioning, he confessed betting for the past two involved in organized illegal online with five others. They used betting and Avathar for the transactions. SIM cards containing the betting and two apps were seized, and Accused No.3 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7191 of2025 Dated 21.07.2025 % was arrested on the spot. Basing on the said report, the police registered a crime against the petitioner/Accused No.5. 3. Sri. I.V.Ch. Prudhviraju, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence; he was falsely implicated in this case; he is sole breadwinner of his family; he is ready abide any conditions to be imposed by this Court and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/Accused No.5. 4. Per contra, Ms.P.Akila Naidu the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of pre-arrest bail stating that investigation is not completed; if the petitioner is enlarged on pre-arrest bail, he would not be available for the investigation and he will repeat the same offence; and it is urged to dismiss the bail application. 5. Perused the record. 6. As seen from the record, the nature of allegations leveled against the petitioner will not fail under the category of organized crime. However, the offences leveled against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment for less than seven (07) years. 4 Dr. YLR, j Crl.P.No.7191 of2025 Dated 21.07.2025 ^ 7. In this regard, it i Arnesh Kumar issued at Para Nos. 11 and 12 reproduced herein below;- IS apposite to mention the Hon'ble Apex Court i V. State of Bihar’,wherein in a detailed guidelines a person, which are being were for arresting Mag/sfrate do Lf authozTl fZ P^fdure. 1973 (forbrevitytheCr.P.C. ) spee^'sZuTjZses ZTsicZniTmbm fte arrest wMe fotwarding/proJucina mZ" 5;e Mag/sfrate for further dsteZn officer OT terms aforesard and IfSc"^ -iZ/aaffioL the MagisZte withnf ZTwZkZfroZ til '^TbTeltZde7yrteSuT^}° '^^tUslrateZcfl of institution of the case whirh f^om the date Superintendent of pSoTt^7s4 ^ de recorded in writing, g) Failure to comply with the directions apart from rendering the police officers its reasons to aforesaid shall concerned liable for ‘(2014) 8 see 273 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7191 of 2025 Dated 21.07.2025 departmental action, he shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before High Court having territorial jurisdiction, h) Authorizing detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court. \ 12. We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than years or which may extend to seven years; whether with without fine. seven or 8. The similar view is also reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court Asfak Alam Vs. the State of Jharkhand^, which also reiterated the guidelines laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar. 9. In the light of the law laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar and Md. Asfak Alam, the investigating officer is under legal obligation to proceed in accordance with law, but he shall follow the procedure prescribed under Sections 41 and 41(A) of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ (now Sections 35 and 35(3) of ‘the B.N.S.S..’ 2023). The petitioner is obliged to render his fullest cooperation in the ongoing investigation. In view of the above, this Court feels that this is not a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/Accused No.5. Hence, the Criminal Petition is disposed of directing the Investigating Officer to comply with in Md. 10. ^(2023) 8 see 632 6 Dr. YLR, j Crl.P.No.7191 of2025 Dated 21.07.2025 ^ Section 35(3) of ‘the BNSV41-A of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ and to strictly follow the directions issued in the cases of Amesh Kumar and MD. Asfak Alam. With the above observations, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. SD/- N. NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 11. \ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To o' 2. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam XII Additional District Visakhapatnam District. CoLlltnera,:“v1sa°hL“aina": 4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor Amaravathi[OUT] 5. One CC to Sri I V Ch Prudhviraju, Advocate 6. Three CD Copies* Visakhapatnam District. _ , Visakhapatnam and Sessions Judge High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OPUC] t r TK PRK HIGH COURT DATED:21/07/2025 \ \ \ ORDER CRLP No. 7191 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL petition