APHC010355952025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7379/2025 Between: NAGENDRA ALIAS SHENAGANA NAGA SATISHKUMAR, S/O. SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/O. RAGHUNADHAPURAM VILLAGE, RAJANAGARAM (MADAL), EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: KADIYAM NEELAKANTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 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 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7379 of 2025 Dated 23.07.2025 the petitioner/Accused for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.119 of 2025 of Prohibition & Excise Station, East Godavari District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 7-B read with 8-B of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 2020 . 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 23.02.2025 at about 09:30 A.M., STF Team-II and the P&EI, Rajamahendravaram South, along with their staff and a mediator, conducted a raid in front of a poultry farm on the road from Srirampuram to Srikrishnapatnam, in Srikrishnapatnam village, Rajanagaram Mandal. At the scene, the team found 400 litres of FJ wash in two plastic drums (200 litres each), suitable for distillation of ID liquor, and 10 litres of ID liquor in two polythene covers (5 litres each). The owner was not present at the site; however, nearby workers (coolies) revealed that the contraband belonged to the accused, Shenagana Naga Sathish Kumar @ Nagendra, S/o Suryanarayana. Samples of 500 ml FJ wash and 300 ml ID liquor were collected for chemical analysis, and the remaining liquor was seized under the cover of a mediator’s report. Accordingly, a case was registered against the petitioner/accused. 3. Sri Kadiyam Neelakanteswara Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence; he 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7379 of 2025 Dated 23.07.2025 was falsely implicated in this case; he is sole breadwinner of his family; he is ready to abide any conditions to be imposed by this Court, and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/Accused. 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. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. As seen from the mediator’s report dated 23.02.2025, the STF Team-II and the P&EI, Rajamahendravaram South, recorded that the accused gave a confessional statement about 400 litres of FJ Wash. The accused further revealed that the petitioner is the supplier of ID Liquor. Granting of the pre-arrest bail to an accused is not a shield or protection for having committed an offence as per the judgment of the 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7379 of 2025 Dated 23.07.2025 Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Panjab1 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of Delhi2. 7. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are six (06) adverse similar antecedents against the petitioner on earlier occasion. They are: Crime No.194 of 2025, Crime No.118 of 2023, Crime No.431 of 2022, Crime No.721 of 2021 and Crime No.952 of 2021. 8. In view of the adverse antecedents against the petitioner and his specific role played in this case, he is disentitled to get pre-arrest bail. Hence, this Court does not deem it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner requests this Court to grant liberty to the petitioner to surrender before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate concerned and move an appropriate application for his release before the learned Magistrate concerned. 9. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed granting liberty to the petitioner to surrender before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate concerned within one (01) week from the date of receipt of copy of this order, and move an appropriate application before the learned 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 2(2020) 5 SCC 1 5 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7379 of 2025 Dated 23.07.2025 Magistrate for enlarging him on bail. The learned Magistrate shall endeavor to dispose of the application on its own merits in accordance with law by giving due and sufficient opportunity of hearing to the learned Public Prosecutor before the learned Magistrate and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time, preferably in two (02) days. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 23.07.2025 RSI 6 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7379 of 2025 Dated 23.07.2025 183 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.7379 of 2025 Date:23.07.2025 RSI