APHC010368242025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7612/2025 Between: Karrreddula Akhil ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. CHETAN PONNURU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. 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 the petitioners/Accused Nos.9 and 12 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.109 of 2025 of Tadepalli Police Station, Guntur District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 137 (2), 109 (1) and 351 (2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNS‟). 2 CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The case of the prosecution is that prior to 07.03.2025 at 23.30 hours at service road towards Mangalagiri in Tadepalli, the defacto complainant and his friends Pavan are returning from Tadepalli in their car, the accused tried to attack them, then the complainant and his friend rushed fastly in their car. The accused chased them in a i20 car and wrongfully restrained their car and forcefully brought complainant out of car and beat him and forcefully taken him into their car and taken away near fields of Mellampudi Village. Meanwhile, his friend pavan ran away. The accused beat him with hands and rods causing bleeding injuries on face and head. Meanwhile, they asked for Nagendra and warned that they kill them any way. The accused taken knifes and tried to kill complainant, in far of life, the complainant shouted loudly and ran from their custody. Meanwhile, some students of KLU and some farmers came to scene by listening to sounds, then the accused ran away. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS: 3. Mr.V.Sai Kumar, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. The Petitioners are the sole earning members of their family, and their arrest would cause irreparable hardship to their dependents. The Petitioners are willing to abide by any condition that this Court may deem fit and proper for the grant of anticipatory bail. The Petitioners have got fixed abode. 3 4. It is further submitted that there is no recovery attributable to the Petitioners and custodial interrogation period was over and such custody is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Petitioners have cooperated with the investigation and there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Therefore, it is prayed that this Court may be pleased to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/Accused Nos.9 and 12 in the interest of justice. ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: 5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed granting of pre-arrest bail contending that the investigation is at a nascent stage and the custodial interrogation of the Petitioners is imperative for eliciting material facts. It is submitted that if the Petitioners are granted pre-arrest bail, there is a grave apprehension that they may not cooperate with the investigation and may evade the process of law. 6. It is further urged that the prosecution also apprehends that the Petitioners may influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, thereby obstructing the fair and impartial investigation. In view of the seriousness of the allegations and the potential risk to the progress of the investigation, it is prayed that the instant bail application be dismissed. 7. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. 4 POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 8. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioners are entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?” ANALYSIS: 9. The allegations of the petitioners/accused Nos.9 and 12 are based on the confession given by accused No.1 that they beat victim with hands and legs. The name of the accused No.12 is not in the F.I.R. The allegation against the accused No.9 is that he gave his car to accused No.1. This Court has already granted pre-arrest bail to accused Nos.5 and 6 in Crl.P.No.3078 of 2025 on 01.04.2025 and accused Nos.7 and 10 in Crl.P.No.3404 of 2025 on 04.04.2025. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances, the gravity and nature of the allegations levelled the Petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/ Accused Nos.9 and 12. CONCLUSION: 11. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. In the event of his arrest, the petitioners/Accused Nos.9 and 12 shall be enlarged on bail subject to they executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty 5 Thousand only), each with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; ii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.9 and 12 shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required; iii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.9 and 12 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; iv. The petitioners/Accused Nos.9 and 12 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned once in a week i.e., on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet. _______________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 18.09.2025 S D P 6 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.7612 of 2025 Date: 18.09.2025 S D P