IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE .-PRESENT.- EEEii THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.-7642 OF 2025 - Betwee n : ofp~ Baljvada padmaja, w/o.umamaheswara Rao, Aged about 47 years, residing at D. No. 61-1-ll, Near SBI Bank, Malkapuram, visakhapatnam. . I.Petjtjoner/AI AND The State of Andhra pradesh, By its public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P, AmaravatI', Through station House officer, BheemunI-Patnam Police StatI'On. ...Respondenfl E= petition lfnder sections 480 & 483 of BNSS/ Under sectI'OnS 437 & 439 of cr.p.c, praying that in the circumstances stated jn the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the criminal Petition, the High Court may bet pleased to enlarge the petitioner/A.1 on Regular Bail in connection with cr,-me No.202/2025 on the file of Bheemunipatnam police Station, dated.-22.04.2025. The Petition coming on for hearing, upon perLISl-ng the PetjtI-On and the inemorandum of grounds fI'led in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI SRAVAN KUMAR NAIDANA, Advocate for the petitioner,I and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, for the Respondent, the court made the following r-.------- // i k`!© '\pHCO10364042025 iii= iiiii= lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl . (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO I CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7642/2025 AND Between = Baiivada Padmaja The State Of Andhra Pradesh [3521] ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED H.RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/acctlsed: Sravan Kumar Naidana Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: Public Prosecutor The Court made the following.I ORDER: The Criminal PetI'tiOn has been filed under.Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity fthe BNSSJ), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.ion bail in Crime No.202 of 2025 of Bhimunipatnam Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 herein for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4),_314 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya SanhI-ta, 2023 (for brevity fthe BNS'), 22, 23 of The Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes (TBUDS) Act, 2019 (for short [the TBUDS Act'). \ / T€L_fa:T ±- _ - .to 2 Dr_, Crl.P.No.7642 L, 202` Dated 31.07.2025 2. The case of the prosecutlon IS that prlor to 22.042025 at 20.loo hours, at GollaveedhI-, the I-nCident was reported on 22.04.2025 at 20.-00 hours. The comp.laI'nant stated that she resides at the above address with her famI|Iy. Her ( husband passed away on 18.10,2022 due to kl-dney-related l'ssues. she has one daughter and o'ne son. The complaI'nant had worked as a private teacher but recently quit herjob due to health issues, as she had a stent placed I-n her heart. [n November 2022, two persons, namely Eata Devj Rao and Gedela sanyasappudu, became acquainted with her through one Koyya venkatalakshmI®, Who Was known to her family, The said persons assured the complainan{ that they would support her and her children financl'ally. They also became acquainted with her family's land in,&o21. Subsequently, Deva Rao .and sanyasappudu informed her that there were J'Ob OPPOr{unitjes I available jn the state and central Governments and that they could arrange placements. Beljevlng their words, the complainan{, along wI'th nearly 30 other -I persons known to her, pal-d a total of Rs. 58,50,000/- to the accused in the form of cash and through phonepe {o their bank accounts. However, the accused persons misappropriated the sat-d amount dI'ShOneStly under the pretext of providl-ng J'Ob PlaCements and cheated her. Hence, she requested that necessary legal actI'On be taken agajns{ the accused, Eata Devi Rao and Gedela sanyasappudu. 3. Heard leamed counsell for the petitioner and the learned AssI'Stant PublI'C Prosecutor. E' Ji_ Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.7642 of 2025 Dated 31.07.2025 -4. Sri Sravana Kumar Naidana, the learned counsel for the petitioner, subhlits that the petitioner has not committed`any offence; she was falsely implicated in this case; she is sole bread winners of her family; she is re ready to abide any conditions to be imposed by this Court,- and urged to enlarge the petitioner on bail. I 5. Per confra, Ms. Akhila Naidu, opposed in granting of bail stating that accusation is well-founded; if the petitioner is granted bail, she will repeat the same offence and urged to dismiss the bail petI'tiOn. 6. Perused the record. 7. As seen from the record, the petitioner and otheraccused lured gullible unemployed persons by promising jobs in the Indian Railways and collected huge amounts of money from them. The petitioner/A;cused No.1 created fake emaiI IDs in the name of the Indian Railways, issued fake appointment letters, and also fabricated identity cards. The petitioner/Accused No.1 was arrested on the strength of a P.T. warrant issued by the learned jurI-SdiCtiOnal Magistrate concerned and has been in judicial custody since ll.04.2025. Thus, the petitioner/Accused No.1 has been in incarceration for more than 90 .days. bb-l--al.>a.so 8. Considering the period of detention, gravity and nature of the allegations leveled against the Petitioner No.1/Accused No.1 and the alleged role played by the Petitioner/Accused No.1, this Court, deems fit it proper to anlarrlJ1 +hz] Dz±+;+:^n^r hl^ 1/^^^l,^^J-I hl^ 1 A.. I-i:I I.,:+I_ JL__ I_[l_..A:_~ _LL_:_~__1 4 D crI.P.No.7642 ~, 2| Dated 31.07.2025 9. ln the result, the criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject {o she executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfactI'On Of the learned XV Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam. iI-. The PetI-tiOner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the Station House Officer, Bhimunipatnam police Station, Visakhapatnam commissionerate, on every saturday I-n between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till the conclusion of the Trial. iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Investigating officer. iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall notcommitor indulge in similar offences in future. v. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall be available to the investigating officer as and when called by him. sd/-SHAIK MOHD. RAFl TRAR ASSISTAN //TRUE COPY// SECiTffi: lCER Tol 1. The XV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate; Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam Distr'lct 2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District 3. The Station House Officer, Bheemunipatnam Police Station, Visakhapatnam District 4. One CC to SRI. SRAVAN KUMAR NAIDANA Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two cos to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. One spare copy PSR _ i ```` \| \`. a jL o ~^ HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED:31/07/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.7642 of 2025 ALLOWED