IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7420 OF 2025 Between: 1. Marisetti Chinna Padma Rao, S/o Late Rama Rao, aged 50 years, Occu cultivation. , R/o Pedavegi Village, and Mandal, Eluru District. 2. Marisetti Naga Prudhvi, S/o Chinna Padma Rao, aged 26 years, Occ Pvt Employee, R/o Pedavegi Village, and Mandal, Eluru District. ... Petltioners/A1 and A2 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravathi. Through Pedavegi PS, Eluru District. ... Respondent Petition under Section 480 and 483 of BNSS is filed, praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioners on bail pending investigation enquiry and trail in Crime No 154/2025 on the file of Pedavegi PS Eluru 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 CH B R P SEKHAR Advocate for the Petitioners, Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent and the Court made the following. ORDER ti% ZAPHC010359022025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7420/2025 Between: Marisetti Chinna Padma Rao and others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): CH.B.R.P. Sekhar Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: Public Prosecutor The Court made the following: ORDER: ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused Nos,/( and 2 on bail in Crime No.154 of 2025 of Pedavegi Police Station Eluru District, registered against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 herein for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2 Dr.YLR, j Crl.P.No.7420 of 2025 Dated 31.07.2025 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 19.06.2025 at around 5;30 an incident occurred at Pedavegi Village, which was reported on the same day at 10;30 p.m. In his complaint, Bollikonda Laxmi Narayana stated that working as a night watchman at a glass factory in Pedavegi Village. He further mentioned that there have been longstanding disputes between him and China Padmarao, a resident of the same village. On 19.06.2025, at about 5:30 a.m., while the complainant was returning home on his motorcycle after completing his duty and was passing near Padmarao’s house, he stopped by the accused persons. At that moment. Accused No.1 a.m. he is one was - Padmarao, his Wife/Accused No.2 Satyavati, and their son Accused No.3 Naga Pruthvi, attacked the complainant with an intention to kill him. Padmarao struck the complainanton the head with iron rod, while Naga Pruthvi and Satyavati aided him and also beat the complainant. Subsequently, the complainant’s family members admitted him to the Government Hospital at Eluru, where the doctors examined him, stitched the head injury, and admitted him for further treatment. Based on the complainant’s report, the Sub-Inspector of Police registered a case and took up investigation. an 3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. Assistant 4. Sri CH.B.R.P. Sekhar, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence; they were falsely implicated in this case; they are sole bread winners of their family; they are 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.7420 of 2025 Dated 31.07.2025 ready to abide any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Per contra, Ms. Akhila Naidu, opposed in granting of bail stating that accusation is well-founded; if the petitioners are granted Ipail, they will repeat I the same offence and urged to dismiss the bail petition. 5. 6. Perused the record. u' 7. As seen from the averments of the statement of the witnesses recorded by the investigating officer, Accused Nos.1 and 2 beat the de-facto complainant with an iron rod on head and right shoulder. As a result, the de- facto complainant sustained severe injuries. However, the would certificate has not yet received by the investigating officer, even after 40 days from the date of the alleged incident. L.W.2 suffered a grievous injury when Accused « No.3 hit with a stone. The petitioners were arrested on 20.06.205 and ha\te been in the judicial custody for the past 40 days. So far, the investigating officer has examined eight witnesses and recorded their statements. The daughter of the brother of the de-facto complainant i.e., L.W.3 was in love with the Petitioner No.2/Accused No.2, and they got married. Thus, Accused No.2 is Son-in-law of the L.W.3. m' Considering the age of the Petitioner No. 1/Accused No.1 and the period of detention undergoing by him and also nature of the allegations leveled against the Petitioner No^l/Accused No.1, this Court, finds it reasonable and 8. % r , „ J Crl.P.No.7420of2025 Dated 31.07.2025 certain proper to stringent conditions. enlarge the Petitioner No.t/Accused No.1 on bail with *n view of the No.2/Accused No.2/Accused No.2/Accused No.2 i nature of the N°-2. this Court, allegations leveled finds that the against the Petition request of the er Petitioner the Petitioner ^0.2 is not convincing at this ijuncture. Hence, 2 is dismissed. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition i's partly allowed with the conditions; following I. The Petitioner/Accused '^o.l shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25 (Rupees Twenty Five .000/- Thousand Only), with two sureties for the I Additional Civil ''Magistrate • lil^e sum each to the -bridge (Junior Division Class, Eluru. ’ satisfaction of the learned -cum-Additional Judicial of I ^he Petitioner/Accused Station House Officer, II. N0.I shall appear before the Pedavegi Police Station every Saturday in between 10:00 Eluru District on am and 05;00 pm, till the conclusion of the Trial. Ill- The District without oh Petitioner/Accused No.l shall nc prior permission from not leave the limits 'nvestig^ting Officer. of the the 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.74:20 of 2025 Dated 31.07.2025 The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall similar offences in future. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall investigating officer in further investigation of the be available to the investigating officer him. IV. not commit or indulge in V. cooperate with the case and shall as and when called by SDI- M.PRABHAKARA RAO ASSISTANT^EGiSTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The I Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division-cum-Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Eluru. 2. The 1®‘Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class: Eluru. 3. The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Eluru. 4. The SHO, Pedavegi PS, Eluru District.v 5. One CC to SRI. CH B R P ^EKHAR Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh.[OUT] 7. One spare copy V..- V---' ■ ksr HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED:31/07/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.7420 of 2025 PARTLY ALLOWED i 0 6 MiG a® ^ TP- \ ■cp' CO