APHC010373122025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7692/2025 Between: Sanapareddy Krishna Reddy ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. ROSEDAR S.R.A Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.’) Sections 480 and 483 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/accused on bail in Crime No.73 of 2025 of Thotlavalluru Police Station, Krishna District, registered for the offences 2 punishable under Section 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘the BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that the accused had a contract in need of 40 cars asked the P.Sudhakar Reddy (deceased) for hiring. Deceased convinced the owners of cars that instalments would continue to be paid by petitioner, and after clearance of finance, cars would be sold. Having believed the words of deceased cars were handed over. For sometime deceased sent money for monthly EMI of cars. For four months instalment could not be cleared. Since the deceased left pending of EMI’s of cars that he hired from the various persons, when they all asked, the deceased informed that he gave all cars to the accused. Nekkalapudi Sambayya filed report though PGRS to Padamata Police Station. The deceased on 05.05.2025 brought the accused to Vijayawada for negotiation. During netogiation accused admitted that he sold the vehicle and utilized money for his personal gains and gave the details of sold vehicles. On 06.05.2025 at morning,P.Sudhakar Reddy died by hanging himself. Before going to die, the deceased himself made videos in his phone by apprising how he was being duped by accused. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State. Perused the material on record. 3 4. Sri Rosedar SRA,the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, therefore, his continued incarceration would cause undue hardship to his dependents. The petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. In light of the foregoing, learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice. 5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 6. On a bare perusal of the averments in the FIR, it appears that the deceased, P. Sudhakar Reddy, was running a car rental business under the name PSR Travels in partnership with the petitioner. P. Sudhakar Reddy had leased out his cars to the petitioner with the assurance that the amounts paid by the petitioner as rent would be utilized towards the repayment of the 4 vehicles loan installments.As the petitioner has not paid that mount, Sudhakar Reddy (deceased) took an extreme step of ending his life by committing suicide by hanging. The FIR also indicates that wife of deceased also died one year ago. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that wife of the deceased also committed suicide one year ago. 7. Considering the nature of the financial transaction between the deceased and the petitioner, the period of detention already undergone by the petitioner, and the gravity of the allegations levelled against him, this Court deems it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner/accused shall be released on bail upon executing a personal bond for Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two (02) sureties for a like sum each, to the satisfaction of the learned X Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Vuyyuru; ii. After release, the petitioner shall appear before the Station House Officer Thotlavalluru Police Station, Krishna District once a week, on every Saturday between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., till cognizance is taken by the learned Trial Court; iii. The petitioner/accused shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned; 5 iv. The petitioner/accused shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for investigation by the investigating officer as and when required; v. The petitioner/accused shall not commit or indulge in the commission of any offence in the future; vi. The petitioner/accused shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer. vii. The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the investigating officer. 8. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 30.07.2025 S D P 6 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.7692 of 2025 Date:30.07.2025 S D P