APHC010399912025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8096/2025 Between: MALKIREDDY VENKATA RAMANA REDDY ALIAS RAMANA REDDY, S/O VENKATESWARA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O 5/45A, PAPAYAPALI VILLAGE, PEDDAMUDIUM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Nelapadu. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.KODATI RAMYA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/sole accused on bail in Cr.No.165/2025 of Peddamudiam Police Station, YSR Kadapa District, registered against the 2 petitioner/sole accused herein for the offence punishable under Sections 118(1), 351(2) and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. Material averments stemming from the prosecution are that on 18.06.2025 at 10:00 p.m., at the residential premises of the complainant situated in Papayipalli village, Peddamudiam Mandal, the accused, Malkireddy Ramana Reddy, criminally intimidated the complainant, Avula Obulesu, by threatening to cause death to him and his son, Narasimhudu. In furtherance of the said criminal intimidation, the accused attempted to assault the complainant with a stick, aiming a blow to his head. However, the complainant, in an act of self-preservation, raised his left hand to shield himself, resulting in the stick striking his left wrist and thereby caused a swelling injury. Upon witnessing the said incident, the complainant’s daughter-in-law and sister intervened to prevent further harm. In response, the accused verbally abused them using obscene and derogatory language, thereby outraging their modesty in the presence of members of the public. The motive for the offence is attributed to a telephonic suggestion made by the complainant to the accused, advising him not to engage in a quarrel with solar workers who had inadvertently severed an electrical wire, resulting in a power outage in the village. The said suggestion appears to have provoked the accused, culminating in the aforementioned acts. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3 4. Sri Kodati Ramya Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence; petitioner was falsely implicated by the police in the crime; petitioner is the sole breadwinner; petitioner would abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court; Petitioner has got fixed abode, hence, if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, Petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. 5. 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 petitioner was enlarged on bail, he would not be available for the investigation and Petitioner may threaten the witnesses; he would escape from the clutches of law; and urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. Petitioner was arrested on 04.07.2025. He has been in the judicial custody for the past 46 days. Initially, FIR was registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 118(1) of ‘the BNS’, but later, on receipt of the wound certificate section of law was altered to Section 118(2) of ‘the BNS’. The allegation against the petitioner/sole accused is that he has beat the victim/de-facto complainant with stout stick causing grievous injury. Investigation was completed and chargesheet was filed on 10.07.2025. The Petitioner is permanent resident of Papayipalli village, Peddamudiam Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. He has got permanent abode. As the investigation is completed and chargesheet is filed, question of Petitioner threatening the 4 witnesses and hampering the investigation may not arise. Keeping the Petitioner for indefinite period in the judicial custody as under trial prisoner would not serve any purpose. 7. On the other hand, if the Petitioner is released on certain stringent conditions, interest of justice would be sub-served. Considering the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the petitioner, facts and circumstances of the case, filing of the chargesheet and the period of detention undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner/sole accused shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jammalamadugu. ii. The petitioner/sole accused shall appear before the Station House Officer, Peddamudiam Police Station, YSR Kadapa District, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner/sole accused shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The petitioner/sole accused shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. 5 v. The petitioner/sole accused shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The petitioner/sole 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 him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. vii. The petitioner/sole accused shall surrender his passports, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he do not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. ________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 19.08.2025 VTS