•> IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO < <1 A' A \ S' r i sr ■9’ at s \ /, ■•'9 - ' CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7971 OF 2025 Between: 1. Kankipati Satish, S/o.Ganga Raju, Aged about 26 years, Occ: JCB Operator, R/o.D.No.6-37, Dantupalli Road, Near Luthern Church , Aravalli Village, Attili Mandal^ West Godavari District. 2. Kankipati Ramesh, S/o. Ganga Raju, Aged about 23 years, Occ: Tractor Driver, R/o.D.No.6-37, Dantupalli Road, Near Luthern Church, Aravalli Village, Attili Mandal, West Godavari District. j ...Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 & 2 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., at Amaravati. ...Respondent Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS, is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioners on bail pending trial of the case in connection with Crime No.83 of 2025 of Attili Police Station, West Godavari in the interest of Justice. ) The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri C.Prakash Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Public Prosecutor for Respondent, the Court made the following APHC010393692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7971/2025 Between: 1.KANKIPATI SATISH, S/0. GANGA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC JOB OPERATOR, R/0. D.NO.6-37, DANTUPALLI ROAD, NEAR LUTHERN CHURCH, ARAVALLI VILLAGE, ATTILI MANDA, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT 2.KANKIPATI RAMESH, S/0. GANGA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC TRACTOR DRIVER, R/0. D.NO.6-37, DANTUPALLI ROAD, NEAR LUTHERN CHURCH, ARAVALLI VILLAGE, ATTILI MANDA, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtpleased to enlarge the petitioners on bail 2 pending trial of the case in connection with Crime No.83 of 2025 of Attili Police Station, West Godavari in the interest of Justice. Counsel for the Petitioner/accused{S): 1.C PRAKASH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 49, 109(1), 118(1) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘BNSS’) seeking to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 on bail in Crime.No.83 of 2025 of Attili Police Station, registered against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 for the offences under Section 109(1), 49, 351(2), 118(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 23.06.2025, at about 04:00 pm, the complainant alleged report stating that she has disputes with lawyer prathap group due to church wall disputes and filed cases. After conducting enquiry by the revenue authorities, the church wall was removed out of the grudge raised against him on 23.06.2025. The group of people tried to kill him and he escaped from there. Further, the lawyer prathap group also pelted stones on the ladies and children who are getting down from the bus when the complainant tried to rescue them, the Accused No.1 stabbed on left side ribs of one Sri Ganti Sai Vamsi with knife with an intent to kill him. When the complainant tried to rescue him, the Accused No.1 stabbed him in his stomach and on his left hand. Due to which, he received bleeding injuries and the other accused also attacked on the complainant and others. Basing complaint report given by the complainant, a case has been registered against the accused. on the 3. Sri C. Prakash Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners the petitioners have not committed , submits that any offence, they was falsely implicated in the case; they are the sole bread-winners of their family; they are languishing in jail for more than 50 days; they are ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and urged to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 4. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that some more material witnesses have to be examined: investigation is not completed; if the petitioners were enlarged on bail, they would not be available for the investigation and Petitioners threaten the witnesses; they would escape from the clutches of to dismiss the bail petition. may law; and urged 4 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. The petitioner No. 1/Accused No.1 was arrested on 25.06.2025. The petitioner No.2/Accused No.2 was arrested on 24.06.2025. They have been in the judicial custody for more than 50 days. Out of five, grievous injuries and three suffered simple injuries. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the dispute arose in between two groups in a village resulted in case and counter case. The petitioners were shown accused in Cr.No.83 of 2025 on the report alleged by Accused No.1. in Cr.No.84 of 2025 was registered against the defacto others. two have suffered as A case complainant and 7. It is reported that no adverse antecedents have been the petitioners. So far, against the accused in Cr.No.84 of 2025 were effected, for which, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits the injuries reported in Cr.No.84 of 2025 were simple in nature, bounden duty of the investigating officer to fasten the liability by mentioning who are the real aggressors and who are the victims. Such conclusions not be arrived at by the investigating officer unless the investigation in the reported against no arrests that It is the would is-miigim' is thoroughly completed. As mentioned supra the petitioners have been in judicial custody for more than 50 days. case 8. So far, 11 witnesses have been examined in this case, they are all primary witnesses. Thus the material portion of the investigation is completed. The request for enlarging the petitioners on bail is convincing and reasonable. The petitioners are the permanent residents of D.No.6-37, Dantupalli Road, Near Luthern Church, Aravalli Village, Attili Mandal, West Godavari District. Considering the gravity and nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners, their alleged role played in this case, the counter case was also filed in respect of the same transaction and the period of detention undergoing by the petitioners, this Court inclines to enlarge the petitioners on bail with the following conditions; I ■ i. The petitioners shall be enlarged on bail subject to they execute a bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistriate of First Class, Tanuku. ii. The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly influence threaten the witnesses. or 6 iii. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall be available to the investigating officer as and when called by him. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm. IV. SD/-M.SRINIVAS ASSISTANT fi^lSTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tanuku The Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Tanuku, West Godavari District. The Station House Officer, Attili Police Station, West Godavari District. One CC to Sri C.Prakash Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCS to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Amaravati.[OUT] One spare copy. 2. 3. 4. 5. High Court of A.P., 6. PSD HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATE:14/08/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.7971 of 2025 ALLOWED