IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8471 OF 2025 Between: 1. Darimadugula Lakshmi, W/o D.Baburao, Age 48 years, R/o D.NO.28-26- Street, Arundalpet, Vijayawada (Urban), 19/B, Mahabub Buckinghampet, Krishna District-520002. 2. Darimadugula Jyothi, D/o D.Baburao, Age 32 years, R/o D.NO.28-26- 19/B, Mahabub Street, Arundalpet, Vijayawada (Urban), Buckinghampet, Krishna District-520002. 3. Medisetty Mahi, W/o Medisetty Vasu, Age 37 years, R/o D.NO.28-26- 19/B, Mahabub Street, Arundalpet, Vijayawada (Urban), Buckinghampet, Krishna District-520002. 4. Darimadugula Lavanya, D/o D.Baburao, Age 32 years, R/o D.NO.28-26- 19/B, Mahabub Street, Arundalpet, Vijayawada (Urban), Buckinghampet, Krishna District-520002. Petitioner/Accused No. 2 to 5 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023(Section 438 of Cr.P.C), is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused No.2 to 5 on bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.259 of 2024 on the file of Suryaraopet Police Station, Vijayawada City for the offences under Section 80 of BNS r/w 3(5) of BNS . > < The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri ARUN SHOWRI G, Advocate for the Petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent, the Court made the following ORDER \ 3 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 petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 5for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.259 of 2024 of SuryaraopetPolice Station, Vijayawada City, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 80 read with Section 3(5) of the Bjiaratiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION the 2. The case of the prosecution is that Dadimadugula Swarna, a 19 years old married woman, died due to the harassment of her husband and in laws and they tortured her mentally and physically demanding to bring Rs.1 lakh towards dowry. Based on the report of the defacto complainant, the respondent police registered a crime against the Accused No.1 i.e., the husband of the deceased Dadimadugula Sankar Babu and petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 5 (Accused No.Ts mother and sisters) in Cr.No.259 of 2024 on the file of Suryaraopet Police Station, Vijayawada City. The petitioner No.1- Darimadugula Lakshmi is mother in law of the 3. deceased and petitioner Nos.2 to 4 are the daughters of the petitioner No.1. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are the married sisters-in-law of the deceased and petitioner No.4/Accused No.5 - Darimadugula Lavanya is un-married sister - in - law of the deceased. 4 CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS: Ms. Shaik Shahedaz, learned counsel for the petitioners argued that petitioner Nos.2 & 3/Accused Nos.3 & 4 got married long ago and they living with their husbands separately. Petitioner No.2/Accused No.3 was got married in the year 2017 and petitioner No.3/Accused No.4 was married in the year 2008. To prove that they got married and living with their husbands, their wedding cards are filed. The accused No.1 was released on regular bail by the learned Mahila Sessions Judge, Vijayawada on 30.12.2024. The petitionersundertake to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and it is urged to allow this Petition. 4. are ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public 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 petitionersare 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. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 6. 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: “Whether the Petitioners are entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?” 5 CONCLUSION: 7. Petitioner Nos.2 & 3/Accused Nos.3 & 4 got married long ago and they are living with their husbands. Petitioner No.2/Accused No.3 was got married in the year 2017 and petitioner No.3/Accused No.4 was married in the year 2008. To prove that they got married and living with their husbands, their wedding cards are filed. The accused No.1 was released on regular bail by the learned Mahila Sessions Judge, Vijayawada on 30.12.2024. They have fixed abode. Considering the fact that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 got married long ago and are living with their families separately, this Court inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to them. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed partly with respect to petitioner Nos.2 & 3. i. In the event of their arrest, the Petitioner Nos.2 & 3/Accused Nos.3 & 4shall be enlarged on bail subject to them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; ii. The Petitioner Nos.2 & 3/Accused Nos.3 & 4shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required; iii. The Petitioner Nos.2 & 3/Accused Nos.3 & 4 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; 8. The Petitioner No.1 is mother-in-law and the Petitioner No.4 is unmarried sister-in-law of the deceased. There are grave allegations levelled against them. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity and nature of allegation levelled against petitioner Nos.1 & 4/Accused Nos.2 &5, this Court is not inclined to grant prearrest bail. Hence, the Petition against them is liable to be dismissed. 9. However, learned counsel for the petitioner Nos.1 & 4 requests to grant liberty to Petitioner Nos.1 & 4 to surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate within oqe week from this day and move appropriate application before the Jurisdiction Court concerned. Criminal Petition is dismissed against Petitioner Nos.1 & 4/ Accused Nos.2 & 5.However, as per the request of the learned Counsel for the petitioners, liberty is granted to the petitioner Nos.1 & 4/Accused Nos.2 & 5 to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate concerned within one (01) week from today and move an appropriate application before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned. The learned Jurisdictional Court concerned shall make endeavour to dispose of the said application in accordance with law, on its own merits by giving due opportunity of hearing to the Public Prosecutor concerned, and also to the victim, if required, and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time, preferably in two (02) days. 10. 7 11. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed. SDI- B.PRAS;^ RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER For To, The I Additional Civil Judge(Junior Division)-cum-1 Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Vijayawada city. The SHO., Suryaraopet Police Station, Vijayawada City. One CC to S^l. ARUN SHOWRI G Advocate [OPUC] Two CCS to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P [OPUC] One spare copy 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. psk 4 HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED:01/09/2025 \ BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.8471 of 2025 ALLOWED % ^ 5 StP rrr im I C/3 .O