APHC010391932025 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: 7937/2025 Between: R DILEEP KUMAR ALIAS DILLIP, S/O R. VIMPAKSHA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCC SOFTWARE EMPLOYEE, R/O D.NO. 2-173, MEKALAJAMANAPALLI VILLAGE, PUNGANUR MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep., by Public Prosecutor, Through Station House Officer, Bangarupalem UPS, Chittoor District, A.P High Court, Amaravathi, Guntur District ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7937 of 2025 Dated 18.09.2025 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 petitioners/Accused for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.55 of 2025 of Bangarupalem Urban Police Station, Chittoor District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Section118 (1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.03.2025, at about 05.50 P.M., on Chittoor–Palamaner NH-69 road, near Mogili Village, Bangarupalem Mandal, an incident occurred which was reported at the police station on the same day at 10.00 P.M. The complainant stated that she had boarded an APSRTC bus at Chittoor, bound for Bangalore. When the bus was about to reach Mogili Village, the accused, who was standing on the roadside, unnecessarily threw a stone at the bus. The stone hit the complainant, who was seated on the left-side window seat, causing a severe blunt injury on her left cheek, resulting in bleeding from her mouth. She was then shifted to CHC, Bangarupalem, through a 108 ambulance for treatment. Hence, the FIR. 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7937 of 2025 Dated 18.09.2025 3. Sri Suresh Kumar Reddy Kalava, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, therefore, his incarceration would cause undue hardship to his dependents. The petitioner was falsely implicated by the police. The petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of the foregoing submissions, learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice. 4. Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest 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 pre-arrest bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. It is further contended that there are specific overt acts leveled against the petitioner, hence grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner is not feasible, as it would amount to giving license for the commission of the offence or shielding him for the commission of the offence, and it is urged to dismiss the petition. 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7937 of 2025 Dated 18.09.2025 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. As seen from the record, the allegation against the petitioner is that while the de-facto complainant seated in a bus, the petitioner threw a stone at her, which hit her left jaw and caused a bleeding injury. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that as per the medical certificate issued by the doctor, the de-facto complainant suffered a fracture injury. Therefore, the Section of law was altered from Section 118(1) of ‘the BNS’ to Section 118(2) of ‘the BNS’. There is also an eyewitness to the incident, namely L.W.2, who is a resident of Kappakam. 7. In view of the specific overt acts attributed against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, as it would amount to giving a shield, or protection or license to the petitioner who had allegedly caused severe injuries to the victim, as per the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Panjab1 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of (NCT of Delhi)2. Hence, this Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 2(2020) 5 SCC 1 5 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7937 of 2025 Dated 18.09.2025 8. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, as per the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, liberty is granted to the petitioner to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned within one (01) week from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, and move an appropriate application before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned. The learned Jurisdictional Court concerned shall endeavour to dispose of the said application in accordance with law, on its own merits, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor concerned, and shall pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time, preferably within two (02) days. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 18.09.2025 RSI 6 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7937 of 2025 Dated 18.09.2025 206 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.7937 of 2025 Date:18.09.2025 RSI