APHC010379532025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7780 OF 2025 Between: Halya Naik @ Bhanthu Halya, S/o. Sreeramulu, Aged about 47 years, Occ: R/o. 16-11, Veeraballi, Godellavaripalli Village, Annamaiah District. ...Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Station House Officer, Tirumala II Town Police Station, Tirupathi, Andhra Pradesh Rep.by its Public Prosecutor High Court, Amaravathi Guntur District ...Respondent Petition under Section 482 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in FIR No. 127 of 2025 dated 19.12.2024 of Tirumala II Town Police Station, Tirupathi, Andhra Pradesh which is registered for an offence under Sec. 318 (4) r/w 3(5) BNS. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. Trupthi Agarwal, Advocate Counsel for the Respondent: The Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. The Court made the following order: COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH at AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction) APHC010379532025 IN THE HIGH [3521] SJ0 FRIDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST r-u/c thousand and twenty five TWO PRESENT JUSTICE Y. LAKSHNIANA RAO THE HONOURABLE DR r-piMIMAI PETITION NO: 778012025 Between; ...petitioner/accused AND Prosecutor High Court, Amaravathi Guntur Distnc ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: TRUPTHl AGARWAL Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.778Qof2025 Dated 01.08.2025 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 petitioner/Accused for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.127 of 2024 of Tirumala II Town Police Station, Tirupati District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 318 (4) read with 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity the BNS’) The case of the prosecution is that on 19.12.2024, the de-facto 2. complainant reported that he, along with his family members, intended to visit Tirumala for the Darshan of Lord Venkateswara Swamy but could not succeed in booking darshan tickets through the TTD online portal. In this regard, he is said to have contacted one Chandrasekhar, who is Accused No.1 in the said FIR. Accused No.1 promised to arrange darshan tickets for the complainant and demanded Rs.20,000/- for the said purpose, to which the complainant transferred the amount through PhonePe to the bank account of one Gollapudi Sai Teja. Accused No.1 then handed over SED darshan tickets valued at Rs.300/-, and the complainant subsequently realized that he had been cheated by the said Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7780 of 2025 Dated 01.08.2025 Chandrasekhar and others, who colluded with each other and deceived and the TTD Institution by collecting Rs.20,000/-. both the complainant Hence, the case was registered against the petitioner/accused. 3. Ms.Trupthi Agarwal, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has further submitted that the member of the family and, he is ready to been falsely implicated by the police. It is petitioner is the sole earning abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the 4. Per contra, Prosecutor petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several contended that if the material witnesses remain to be examined. It is petitioner is released on pre-arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. he may abscond learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. Heard the 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7780 of 2025 Dated 01.08.2025 ■; 6. As seen from the record, the alieged offence leveled against the petitioner is punishable with imprisonment for less than seven (07) years. In this regard, it is apposite to mention the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar”', wherein a detailed guidelines were issued at Para Nos.11 and 12, for arresting a person, which are being reproduced herein below:- 7. 11.Our endeavor in this judgment is to ensure that police officers do not arrest accused unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorize detention casually and mechanically. In order to ensure what we have observed above, we give the following direction: a).AH the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498- A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.j; b)AII police officers be provided with a check list containing specified sub- clauses under Section 41 (1)(b)(ii); c) The police officer shall forward the check list duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention; d) The Magistrate while authorizing detention of the accused shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorize detention; e) The decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing; *(2014) 8 see 273 5 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7780 of 2025 Dated 01.08.2025 f) Notice of appearance in terms of Section be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be ^ . Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing; <,hall a) Failure to comply with the directions f™ apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for TpaZental action, he shall also be I^Ueto be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before High Court having territorial Jurisdiction, h) Authorizing detention without recording ''^aso aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be departmental action by the appropriate High as liable for Se hasten to add that the c only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the kP.U Ltfion 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case infand but also such cases where offence is punishable with ilZonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years: whether with or without fine. I or is also reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in of Jharkhandi which also reiterated the in the case of Arnesh Kumar. The similar view is 8. Md. Asfak Alam v. the State guidelines laid down In the light of the law laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar and under legal obligation to he shall follow the procedure 9. Md. Asfak Alam, the investigating officer is accordance with law, but proceed in 41 and 41(A) of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ (now Sections is obliged to render prescribed under Sections and 35(3) of ‘the B.N.S.S..’ 2023). The petitioner is 35 their fullest cooperation in the ongoing investigation. ^(2023) 8 see 632 6 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7780 of2025 Dated 01.08.2025 \ 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of directing the Investigating Officer to comply with Section 35(3) of ‘the BNS741-A of the Cr.P.C.,’ and to strictly follow the directions issued in the cases of Arnesh Kumar and MD. Asfak Alam. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SE OFFICER To, 1. The Station House Officer, Tirumala II Town Police Station, Tirupathi Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. One CC to M/s. Trupthi Agarwal, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. [OUT] 4. Three CD Copies GPC sree HIGH COURT DATED: 01/08/2025 ORDER CRLP NO. 7780 OF 2025 DISPOSING OF THIS CRIMINAL PETITION