i. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: HONOURABLE DR JUSl`lCE Y. LAKSHMANA CRIMINAL PETmON NO: 7989 OF 2025 .Air-_\\~,-i;i_` ts.-::_.L|-,_ -\{ i- -3Z.*r aa a£ Between : ''*,-p..i:r':€£ 1. K Naveen, S/o K.Venkatramana @ chinnappaiah, Aged about 22 years, Occ- Agriculture R/at D.No.2-24, Sreeramulapalle, Ramasamudram Mandal, Annamayya District. 2. P Sandeep @ P Sudeep, S/o Subramanyam, Aged about 19 years, Occ Agriculture R/at Erraboyanip?IIe, Ramasamudram Mandal, Annamayya i District. 3. Shantappa Bodi @ Shanthabpa, S/o. Venkata Swamy Aged about 50 years, R/at. D.No.134, Gudathata GaddI' Avuladoddi village SrI-nI-VaSaPuram taluk Kolar District Karnataka state. 4. Venkatramanappa, s/o venkataswamy, Aged about 65 years, R/at. Doddajala, Bangalore North`-` J ...Petitioner/Accused A7, A12, A13 and A14. AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, by its public prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Amaravathi. ...Respondent Petition under section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (438 of Cr.P.C), praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in,support of the criminal petI'tiOn, the High Court may be pleased to enlarg`e the petitI-OnerS On Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 50 of 2025 on the file of the Ramasamudram Police Station, Annamayya District in the event of their arrest. Counsel forthe petitI-OnerS- .-Ms. S Parineeta Counsel for the ResponcI©mt : Ms.P.Akhila, Assistant Public Prosecutor. The Coullt made the following ORDER: APHCO10393572025 Effi lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHIVIANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7989/2025 Betwee n : K NaVeen and Others AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh counsel for the petitioner/accused(s): 1. S PARINEETA [3521] ".PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) \ ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: Cr'lminaI Petit-Ion has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity [the BNSSJ) by the petitioners/Accused No.7,12, and 14 for granting pre-arrest bail in connection with cr'Ime No.50 of 2025 of Ramasamudram Police Station, Annamayya District, registered for the alleged offenCeS Punishable under Sections 191 (2), 191(3),126(2),109(1),118(1),115(2), 61(2) arid 351(2) read with 149 6f the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity fthe BNS'). Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.7989 of 2025 Dated 22.08.2025 2. The case of the prosecution is the de-facto complaI-nant alleged that he and Accused Not were working as cooII'eS in Bangalore. Gorrela Gangacihar and his wife, Gayathri, were also working under Accused No.1 After Gayathri went missing with her younger son, a complaint was lodged and she was traced by the police and handed over to her husband. suspending Accused No.1Js involvement in his wife's disappearance, Gangadhar informed village elders, and a panchayat was called. DurI-ng the PanChayat, Accused No.1 allegedly abused and assaulted Gangappa. Later, Accused No.2 (Krishnamurthy, son of Accused No.1) and others reportedly went to Yerraboina village, threatened the villagers, and created panic. AIthough a compromise was made on o7.062025, later that night at about 10:30 P.M., Accused Nos.1 to 15 allegedly restrained the vehicles of the complainant's family and attacked them with rods, sticks, and sickles, causing bleeding injuries. The injured were shifted to Madanapalle Government Hospital. Later as the de-facto complainant brother and his son/yeswanth suffering with serious injuries they were shifted to NIMHANAS Hospital Bangalore for better treatment. Basing on the said report of the complainant police registered a crime. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. Er.ri Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.7989 of2025 Dated 22.08.2025 4. Ms. Parineetha, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitI'OnerS have not committed any offence; they were falsely implicated in this case. They are the sole breadwinner of their family. They are ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this court. It is urged to grant pre- arrest bail to the petitioners. 5. Per confra, Ms. P. Akhila, the learned AssI'Stant Public Prosecutor, opposed in grantI'ng Of bail Stating that some more material Witnesses have tO be examined; investigation is not completed; if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, they would not be available for the investigation and he would escape from the clutches of law. However, it is submitted that there are no adverse antecedents against the petitioners, and requested to pass appropriate orders. 6. As seen from the record, there are specific overt acts attributed to petitioner Nos.1 to 3/Accused Nos.7, 12, and 13. This Court has already dismI'SSed the Pre-arrest bail Petition filed by Petitioner No.3/Accused No.13 on 21.07.2025 in Crl.P.No.7247 of 2025. The allegation against petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and other accused persons is that they attempted to do away with the life of the victim. In view of the specific overt acts attributed to petitioner Nos.1 to 3/Accused Nos.7,12, and 13, this Court is not inclined to grant pre- arrest bail to them. Accordingly, the criminal petition stands dismissed as against them. Insofar as petitioner No.4/Accuseci No.14 is concemed, only omnibus allegations have been made agaI-nSt him. He is aged about 65 years, and it is noted that Accused Nos.2 to 4, 6, 9, and ll have already been Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.7989 of2025 Dated 22.08.2025 enlarged on regular bail by the learned Trial Court. The petitioner No.4/Accused No.14 is a permanent resident of Doddajala, Bangalore North. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegation levelled against the petitioner and his alleged role played in this case, this Court deems it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner No.4/accused No.14. 7. ln the result, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed with the following conditions: i. ln the event of his arrest, the Petitioner No.4/Accused No.14 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only), each with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; ii. The Petitioner No.4/Accused No.14 shall make himself available for investigation as and when required; iii. The Petitioner No|4/Accused No.14 shall not cause any . threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; iv. The Petitioner No.4/Accused No.14 shall appear before the station House Officer concerned once a week i.e., every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet. 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.7989 of 2025 Dated 22.08.2025 v. The Petitioner No.4/Accused No.14 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. vi. The Petitioner No.4/Accused No.14 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating offlc-er. [f he claims that he - does not have passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the investigating officer. SD/-M.SRINIVAS ASSISTANT RE //TRUE COPY// SECTION OF T < TRAR To, 1. The Station House Officer,`tR`a`masamudram police stall-On, Annamayya District. 2. One CC to Ms. S Parineeta, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to Public Prosecutc}r, High Court ofAndhra Pradesh [OUT] 4. One spare copy CVSS B-. 't +. I 'fri' lj:.i HIGH COURT Dr.YLR,J DATED :22/08/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.7989 of 2025 PARTLY ALLOWED