IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl ,?.r€;7`; (ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8240 OF 2025 Between : Kukkala ThI-mmanna @ Boya Kukkala Thimmanna @ Yerranna, S/o. K.Minnella, Hindu, aged 55 years, H.No.1-151, New B.C.Colony, Brahmanadoddi Village, C.BelagaI Mandal, KurnooI District. ...Petitioner/A3 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. ...Respondent Petl-lion under Section 482 of BNSS, (Section 438 of Cr.P.C), 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 Anticipatory Bail in the event of arrest of the petitioner/A-3 in Crime No.16 of 2025 dated 01.02.2025, on the file of C.Belga! P.S., KurnooI DistrI-Ct. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Ms. G.Jayalakshmi Devi, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Public Prosecutor for Respondent, the Court made the following APHCO10409692025 EHFiE lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8240/2025 [3521] Between : Kukkala Thimmanna @ Boya Kukkala Thimmanna ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED @ Yerranna AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.G.JAYALAKSHMI DEVI ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1:PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 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 Petitioner/Accused No.3, for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.16 of 2025 of C.BelgaI Police Station, Kurnool District, reg-lstered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 191(2),191(3),118(1),109(1), 126(2), 351 (2) r/w 109 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for sho-rf tthe BNS'). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 01.02.2025 at about 6.30 hours, the Accused Nos.1 to 16 formed themselves into an unlawiul assembly armed with deadly weapons and attacked the de-fa6to complainant with an intention to kill him, and beat him with sickle on tlead and caused bleeding injuries and also attacked his father-in-law and caused bleeding injuries. All the accused threatened the de-facto compla'inant with dire consequences CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PET[T[ONER: 3. Sm{. G.Jaya Lakshmi Devi, learned counsel for the Petitioner respectfully submits that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. The Petitioner is the sole earning member of his family, and his arrest would cause irreparable hardship to his dependents. The Petitioner is willing to abide by any condition that this Court may.deem fit and proper for the grant of anticipatory bail. The Petitioner has got fixed abode. 4. lt is further submitted that there is no recovery attributable to the Petitioner and custodial interrogation period was over and such custody is not warranted in the-facts and circums'tances of the case. The Petitioner has cooperated with the investigation and there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Therefore, it is prayed that this Court -==iffrmas=:S=±==:I:±as may be pleased to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.3 in the interest of justice. ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: 5. Per contra, Ms. P, Akila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed _granting of pre-arrest bail contending that the investigation is at a nascent stage and the custodial interrogation of the Petitioner is imperative for eliciting material facts. [t is submitted that if the fi. Petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail, there is a grave apprehension that he may not cooperate with the investigation and may evade the process of law. 6. lt is further urged that the Petitioner has one antecedent and there exists a real likelihood of committing similar offences I'f released on bail.. The prosecution also apprehends that the Petitioner may influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, thereby obstructing the fair and impartial investigation. / In view of the seriousness of the allegations and the potential risk to the integrity of the investigation, it is prayed that the instant bail application be dismissed. 7. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 8. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration is: tLWhether the Petitioner is entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?" ANALYSIS: 9. The allegation against the petitioner/accused No.3, on perusal of the record, is that he along with the other accused beat the defac{o complainant. .,_Ill- ln this case, all the accused are released on bail except the petitioner. out of 16 accused,14 accused were arrested and enlarged on bail. Accused Nos.6 and 7 were granted pre-arrest bail by the learned trial Court, Accused No.13 Was granted Pre-arrest bail by this Court vicle Order dated 23.07.2025 in CrI.P.No.6945 of 2025. So far,10 witnesses are examined. Receipt of would certificate is pending. The petitioner is aged about 55 years and he has been suffering` from ill-health. The wife of petitioner died recently. The counter case was lodged based on the report of the one of the accused l'n this case against the defacto complainan{ and other persons in crime No.17 of 2025 of C.Belgal Police Station, KurnooI District. The allegation against the petitioner/accused No.3 is that he beat Vadde Chinna Venkatesh with stick on his left hand and caused _swelling injury. AIthough the learned Assistant Public prosecutor `L- submits that there is one adve'rse antecedent against the petitioner vide crime No.145 of 2025 registered for the alleged offence uncler Section 307 of 6the .`-_ ' ~+ I.P.C.', the accused is presumed innocent until the guI-It is proved. The --.-ct-.-- --\ -. Petitioner iS Permanent resident Of Brahmanadoddi village, C.BelagaI Mandal, Kurnool District. The Petitioner has got fixed abode. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances, the gravl'ty and nature of the allegations levelled the Petitioner, this court is I-nCIined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/ Accused No.3. CONCLUSION ll. ln the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i, ln the event of his arrest, the petitioner/Accused No.3 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting poII|Ce Officials; The Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall make himself available for investigation as and when required; iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall appear before the station House OffI'Cer concerned aS and When required. V- The Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall not leave the district limits without the express permission from the station House Officer concerned. sD/-U. SRIDEVl //TRUE COPY// ASSISTAN REGISTRAR CTION OFFICER To, 1. The Station House Officer, C.BelgaI Police Station, Kurnool District. 2. One CC to Ms. G.Jayalakshmi Devi, Advocate [opuc] 3. Two CCs toPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HI'gh Court of A.P., AmaravatI-. [OUT] 4. One spare copy. PSD HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATE:10/09/2025 ANTICIPATORY BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.8240 of 2025 ALLOWED