APHC010410912025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8289 OF 2025 Between: 1. J Yobu, S/o. Jayaraj, Aged about 60 years, Occ; Agricultural Collie, R/o D.No 6-37/1, Rasanavalli Harijanawada, Gudipala Mandal, Chittoor District. 2. Y Ramdeepak, S/o Yabu, Aged about 22 years, Occ: Student, R/o D.No 6-37/1, Rasanavalli Harijanawada, Gudipala Mandal, Chittoor District. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED 2 & 3 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep By Public Prosecutor, AP High Court Through Chittoor Urban Police station, Chittoor District. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C and 482 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioners/Accused No-2 and 3 Anticipatory bail in the event of arrest/surrender in respect FIR No.83 of 2025 dated 02.06.2025 on the file of Chittoor Urban Police Station Chittoor District on for the alleged offences punishable Under section 7 (B) r/w 8-A, 8-C(a) of AP ’ ' Prohibition & Excise amendment Act 2020 Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI TATA SINGAIAH GOUD Counsel for the Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER: APHC010410912025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8289/2025 Between: 1.J YOBU, S/0. JAYARAJ, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURAL COLLIE R/0 D.NO 6-37/1 ,RASANAVALLI HARIJANAWADA, GUDIPALA MANUAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2.Y RAMDEEPAK, S/0 YABU, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC STUDENT, R/0 D.NO 6-37/1 ,RASANAVALLI HARIJANAWADA, GUDIPALA MANUAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep By Public Prosecutor, AP High Court Through Chittoor Urban Police station, Chittoor District. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petltioner/accused(S): 1.TATASINGAIAH GOUD Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: a.. 2 ORDER: This criminal petition has been filed under Section 482 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the petitioners-accused Nos. 2 and 3 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.83 of 2025 of Prohibition and Excise Station, Chittoor Urban, registered for the offence punishable under Section 7-B read with Sections 8-A and 8-C (a) of A.P. Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020. Case of the prosecution is that on 02-06-2025 at about 5.30 p.m. reliable information about illegal preparation of illicitly distilled liquor, the Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspector, Chittoor Urban, along with their staff and mediators, conducted a raid at Gurralamitta Area, Gudipala Mandal, where accused Nos. 1 to 3 were found near a ZR vehicle with two black rubber tubes. On seeing the officials from a distance, accused Nos. 2 ran away into bushes and accused No. 3 removed the tubes and escaped on a motorcycle. The police caught accused No. 1 at the spot and seized two black rubber tubes containing 30 liters of I.D. liquor and also found blue plastic drums with 400 liters of fermented jaggery wash meant for making illicit liquor. on 2. Mr. Tata Singaiah Goud, learned counsel for the petitioners, contends that the petitioners are innocents of the alleged offence and have been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioners are the sole earning members of their family and they are ready to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. 3. 3 Public learned Assistant 4. Per contra, Mr.NeelotphalGanji Prosecutor,vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioners are released on pre arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Public 5. Prosecutor.Perused the record. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are adverse antecedents reported against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that based on the confession of accused No. 1, accused Nos. 2 and 3 were arrayed in this case. As per the mediators' report and the version of the prosecution, the petitioners are the manufacturers of I.D. liquor. In the mediators' report, it was mentioned that the petitioners ran away from the scene of offence and they were thereupon identified by the mediators. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners inasmuch as it would amount to license for the person against whom serious allegations and specific 7. giving a overt acts are levelled and it would also amount to giving a shield or protection for commission of non-bailable offence per the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab^ and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. ^ (1980) 2 see 565 4 ■jKl State of DelhP. Hence, there are no merits in the criminal petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. In the result, the criminal petition is dismissed. However, as per the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, liberty is granted to the petitioners-accused Nos. 2 and 3 to surrender before the jurisdictional magistrate within a period of one (1) week from today and move an appropriate application before the jurisdictional Court concerned. On such surrender and on moving of such application, the jurisdictional Court concerned is directed to dispose of the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of two days thereafter by giving due opportunity to learned Public 8. Prosecutor concerned. ^ (2020) 5 see 1 SDI- U.SRIDEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY 11 SEeTION OFFieER To. 1. The I Additional District & Sessions Judge; Chittoor, Chittoor District. 2. The Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise Chittoor Urban Police Station, Chittoor District. 3. One CC to Sri Tata Singaiah Goud Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CC's to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies SAM TAC HIGH COURT DATED;20/08/2025 ORDER CRLP No. 8289 of 2025 I 2 2 AUG 2025 ^ . Current Section . DISMISSING THE CRLP