\ •i: APHC010404642025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI u WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8581 OF 2025 Between: 1. Mundineni Ramakrishna, S/o Venkataswamy, aged about 32 years, R/o.5-19, Nagavaram Village, H/o Mukkollu, Gaduru Mandal, Krishna District, Aadhar No.3381 1336 2505. 2. Sammeta Ganapathi Rao alias Ganapathi, S/o Subbarao, aged about 37 years, R/o.2/42-1, Mukkollu Village, Guduru Mandal, Krishna District, Aadhar No.6769 7902 0229 ...Petitioners/Accused No.1 & 7 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through S.H.O., Inaguduru Urban P.S., Krishna District, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. ...Respondent/De-facto Complainant 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 grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners/ A-1 and A-7 in Crime No. 115 of 2025 Dt.24-06-2025 on the file of Inaguduru Urban PS registered under sections. 308(2); 351(2); 79 r/w 3(5) of BNS. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 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 Court may be pleased to grant interim bail to the accused in Crime No. 115 of 2025 Dt.24-06-2025 of Inaguduru P.S. registered under sections. 308(2): 351(2): 79 r/w 3(5) of BNS. Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri CHALLA AJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order: f APHC010404642025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF A^JDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] L? WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8581/2025 Between: Mundineni Ramakrishna and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused{S): Challa Ajay Kumar Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: Public Prosecutor The Court made the following: ORDER: ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik SurakshaSanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the petitioners/Accused No.1 and 7 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 115 of 2025 on the file of Inaguduru Urban Police Station, Krishna District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 351(2), 79 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity'the BNS’). 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8581of2025 Dated 20.08.2025 on 23.06.2025 at about 21;36 2. The case of the prosecution is that, hours, at Koneru Center, Machilipatnam, reported by the complainant stated that the an incident occurred which on 24.06.2025 at 18:30 hours. waS' The complainant was solemnized marriage of her Subsequently, disputes son with Arunadevi on 17.04.2019. arose between them and prior to the which are present incident, certain before the Court. On the date where they had gone to weigh gold for cases had already been filed pending returning from a shop a settlement in approached her of the incident while the purpose of reaching the presence of mediators, son-in-law’s bike, pulled out the physically assaulted her the accused along with others vehicle’s plug to prevent it from starting, pushed her aside. verbally abused her daughter,- snatched a bag containing ?5,00,000, and fled from gold ornaments, silver articles and cash of is further alleged that Arunadevi the scene. It i and Adilakshmi abused the forcibly grabbed her daughter from her neck complainant and her daughter in filthy language. ’s hair, snatched away a six-kasula gold chain and threatened to kill them. pushed them aside, property lost was 38 kasulu The total of gold, silver. and cash, all worth about complainant approached the police ^19,28,000/-. Thereupon, the lodged a report for was issued. station and a case was registered and FIR necessary action. Hence, 3. Sri Challa Ajay Kumar, that the petitioners have the learned counsel for the not committed petitioners, submits any offence; they were falsely 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8581 of2025 Dated 20.08.2025 implicated in this case; they are sole breadwinners of their family; they are ready abide any conditions to be imposed by this Court, and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners/Accused No.1 and 7. Per contra, Ms.P.Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, 4. opposed in granting of pre-arrest bail stating that investigation is not completed: if the petitioners are enlarged on pre-arrest bail, they would not be available for the investigation and they will repeat the same offence; and it is urged to dismiss the bail application. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant 5. Public Prosecutor representing the State. Perused the record. As seen from the record, the offences levelled against the 6. petitioners/Accused No.1 and 7 are punishable with imprisonment for less than seven (07) years. In this regard, it is apposite to mention the Hon’ble Apex Court in 4 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 7. herein below:- 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: (2014) 8 see 273 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8581 of 2025 Dated 20.08.2025 a). AH the State Governments to instruct its notice officers thfnecesatfJ f.^^ f at.o»/ me necessity for arrest under the parameters laid rVou/n aboveJowing from Section 41 Code If CrnTai Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the CrPC ’)■ %Zmedtu'f2fse ^ ®°"fa/mng specmed sub- clauses under Section 41 (1)(b) (ii) ■ II d) The Magistrate white authorizing detention of the acctyseof shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recordina its ^ffaction, the Magistrate wili authorize detention; ^ fhJi\^^ not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to date of the '^sJiMion of the case with a copy to the Magistrate whL ditlinf f Py Superintendent of police of the d strict for the reasons to be recorded in writing- f) Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41-A of Cr PC be serve.d on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extenZd by Z bec7dTdTtZriZT ~ directions aforesaid shall JLTi /-ender/egr the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, he shall also be liable to be punished h) Authorizing detention without .. ZhTZ judicial Magistrate concerned shall be CoZ ^^P^dmental action by the appropriate High recording reasons as 12 We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the I PC or buf'afJ °'T cal in hanJ ut also such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less hTan seven 5 Dr.YLR, J , Crl.P.No.8581of2025 Dated 20.08.2025 The similar view is also reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court i Asfak Alam v. the State of Jharkhand^ laid down in the case of Ames/? Kumar. 8. in Md. which also reiterated the guidelines 9. In the light of the law laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar and Md. Asfak Alam. the investigating officer is under legal obligation to proceed accordance with law, but he shall follow the Sections 41 and 41(A) of ‘the Cr.P.C. in procedure prescribed under (now Sections 35 and 35(3) of ‘the B.N.S.S.; 2023). The petitioner is obliged to render his fullest cooperation in the ongoing investigation. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of directing the Investigating Officer to comply with Section 35(3) Cr.P.C., and to strictly follow the directions i Kumar and MD. Asfak Alam. of ‘the BNSV41-A of ‘the issued in the cases of Arnesh ^ (2023) 8 see 632 Sd/- M SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, . The Station House Officer, Inaguduru Police Station, Krishna District. 2. One CC to Sri Challa Ajay Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh[OUT] 1 3. Two CCs to 4. Two CD Copies AKR vna HIGH COURT DATED:20/08/2025 ORDER CRLP NO. 8581 OF 2025 01 SEP 2025^ DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION