APHC010349422025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 485 OF 2025 Appeal under Section 14A of the SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989 the High Court may be pleased to release the Petitioner/AI in Crime No. 192 of 2025, Kurnool III Town PS, dated 11.06.2025, on bail by setting aside the Order dated 03.07.2025 in CRL.M.P.No.571 of 2025 Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act-Cum-VI Addl. District And Sessions Judge, Kurnool, Kurnool District. Between: praying that on the file of the Special Sadhu Koushik Reddy, S/o.Sadhu Shiva Kumar Reddy, aged 30 years Occ:R/o.H.No.39-7-CI, Vivek Nagar, KVR Gardens, Osmania Road, Kurnool City, Kurnool District. College ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED (A1) AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. Palamarri Prasanna, D/o.P.Subbaraju, aged 27 years, Occ.Pvt Job, R/o.49-5-1173-2, Lakshmi Nagar, Kurnool. Ph.No.7093039625. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 2. w r Counsel for Petitioner : SRI LAKSHMIKANTH REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.1: ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for Respondent No.2;NONE APPEARED The Court made the following JUDGMENT : DESAI APHC010349422025 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 SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL APPEAL No: 485/2Q2fi [3368] Between: 1.SADHU KOUSHIK REDDY, S/0 SADHU SHIVA KUMAR REDDY, AGED 30 YEARS, OCC R/0, H. NO. 39-7-CL VIVEK NAGAR, KVR GARDENS, OSMANLA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL CITY, KUMOOL DISTRIE ...APPELLANT AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIE PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATHI 2.PALAMARRI PRASANNA, D/0 P SUBBARAJU AGED 27 YRS, OCC. PVT JOB R/0 49-5-1173-2 , LAKSHMI NAGAR KURNOOL PH.NO 7093039625 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Appellant: 1.LAKSHMIKANTH REDDY DESAI Counsel for the Respondent{S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 #c> THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL APPEAL No: 485 of 2025 JUDGMENT: Heard Sri Lakshmikanth Reddy Desai, learned counsel for the appellant/accused (A1) through video conference and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that notice was taken to the defacto-complainant as required under law. None appeared for the defacto-complainant. Sri Lakshmikanth Reddy Desai appellant would submit that this appeal is filed challenging the order dated 03.07.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.571 of 2025 in Crime No.192 of 2025 of Kurnool III Town Police Station. He would further submit that the petitioner was arrested on 16.06.2025 for the offence under Sections 69, 75(2) and 351(3) read with Section 3(5) of Bharathiya Nyaya Samhitha, 2023 (In short B.N.S.) and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015, alleging that he promised the victim to marry and induced her, believing the promise, the victim moved with the appellant, and the appellant taking advantage of the same had sexual relations with the victim and later, refused to marry her. Hence, the victim presented a report to the police, and police registered F.I.R. 2. 3. 4. learned counsel for the in Crime No.192 of 2025 of Kurnool III Town Police Station, on 11.06.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant would further submit that the . material investigation was completed in the case, the appellant is having fixed abode, and there is no material to show that he will intimidate the victim or any other witnesses in the case, and he will attend the Court to face the trial. He would further submit that false case was laid against the appellant for financial gain. In those circumstances, the appellant/accused can be enlarged on bail pending : trial, but the learned trial Court under the impugned order dismissed the bail petition, without assigning any valid reasons. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the application and contended that investigation is not yet concluded, and the accused will intimidate the victim, if he is enlarged on bail. 6. 7. The point for consideration that would arise in this Criminal Appeal is as under: “Whether the order of the trial Court is legally sustainable; whether the appellant/accused is entitled to be enlarged on bail?" 8. POINT: The F.I.R. was registered on 11.06.2025 for the offence under Sections 69, 75(2) and 351(3) read with Section 3(5) of B.N.S. 2023, and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015. The allegation against the appellant is'that he made a promiseto marry the 4 victim and induced her to have sexual intercourse. Later, the appellant refused to marry the victim. Hence, she presented a report to the police. 9. FIR was registered on 11.06.2025. The appellant was arrested on 16.06.2025 during investigation. He filed bail application. It was dismissed by the trial Court under the impugned order. 10. No tangible material is coming out from the record in support of the allegation that the appellant would intimidate the victim, if he is enlarged on bail or that he will not attend the Court during trial. The question relating to promise and inducement by the appellant is a triable issue in the trial. The victim was a major at the time of the alleged offence. Material part of investigation has been completed. In those circumstances, the learned trial Court should have enlarged the petitioner on bail. 11. In that view of the matter, the order of the learned trial Court is not legally sustainable. Therefore, the appellant/accused is entitled to be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: i) The appellant/accused shall be enlarged on bail, on execution of a personal bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two (02) sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Special Sessions Judge For Trial of Cases Under SC/ST (POA) Act-cum-VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool. 5 ii) The appellant/accused shall not leave the country without permission of the Court. The appellant shall not intimidate the victim or witnesses iii) in any manner. iv) On release, the appellant/accused shall appear before the learned Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act-cum-VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool, on every fourth Saturday for a period of three (03) months or till filing of charge sheet, whichever is earlier. V) If the appellant/accused violates any of the above conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to file an application seeking cancellation of the bail. 12. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed. As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any, pending SD/- E.KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (POA) Act-Cum-VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool, Kurnool District. (By Speed Post) 2. The Station House Officer, Kurnool III Town Police Station, Kurnool District. (By Speed Post) 3. The Superintendent, District Jail, Kurnool. (By Speed Post) 4. One CC to Sri Lakshmikanth Reddy Desai, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP at Amaravati. [OUT] 6. The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi 7. Two CD Copies BSV TAC HIGH COURT DATED:28/07/2025 JUDGMENT CRLA NO. 485 OF 2025 1% HJL*® if ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL APPEAL