IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAR THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUS TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE : PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO [3521 I CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8514 OF 2025 Between: Teja @ Mutthineni Raviteja, S/o Mutthineni Anjineyulu, aged 30 years, Occ: Private Employee, R/o 7-73 Janmabhoomi Naga, Rapthadu, Ananthapuramu, Andhra Pradesh-515002 Petitioner/Accused AND The State ofAndhra Pradesh, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. Respondent/Complainant Petition under section 438 of BNSS, praying that in the cI'rCumStanCeS Stated in the grounds filed in support of the criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.4 on Antl'cI-PatOry Bail in the event of their arrest in crime in FIR.No. 37 of 2025 on the file of Rapthadu PS, Ananthapuram District; COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER:Sri AIlu Hari Narayana COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER:Public Prosecutor The Court made the following r- APHCO10422342025 lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special orjgjna] Jurjsdjctjon) [3521] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OFAUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO £B±nLMINAL PETITION NO: 8514J_2LQ2§ Betweenll TEJA ALIAS MUTTHINENI RAVJTEJA, S/O MUTTHINENI ANJINEYULU, AbED 30 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O 7-73 JANMABHOOMI NAGA,I RAPTHADU, ANANTHAPURAMU, ANDHRA PRADESH-515002 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep. by the public prosecutor, High Court ofAndhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the petitioner/accused: 1.ALLU HARI NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petl'tion has been fI|led under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevI'ty fthe BNSS') by the Petitioner/Accused No.4 for granting of pre-arrest baI-I in connection with crime No.37 of 2025 of Rapthadu police station, Ananthapuram District, registered _\ \ * for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 324(4),118(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity tthe BNS'). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 16.O3.2025 at 5:00 p.m., at Janmabhoomi Nagar, Rapthadu Mandal, the accused persons, namely Dharmateja, Maruthi Naidu, Eich;r Venkata Naidu Teja @ Chinna, Lingamaiah, Chandrakala, all, residents of Janmabhoomi Nagar, Rapthadu Mandal, along with certain unidentified associates, in furtherance of their cominon intention and owing to pre-^existing animosity arising out of a dispute concerning a house site transaction at Janmabhoomi Nagar, unlawfully assembled and launched a violent assault upon the complainant, Gor{hi Lakshminaryana. During the said incident, the accused persons, armed with cement bricks and sticks, physically assaulted the complainant, his son Anil, his daughter-in-law Parvathamaa, and other individuals present at the scene. The said assault resulted in multiple injur'les, including bleeding wounds, to the victims. ln the course of the attack, the accused also caused damage to the complainant's residential property by breaking the iron compound gate. 3. Following the incident, the complainant and other injured persons were admitted to the Government General Hospital, Ananthapuramu for medical treatment. CONTENTIONS dF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 4. Sr'l AllL Hari Narayana, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner has not committed any offence; he was falsely implicated in / Y 3 this case,- he is ready abide any conditi'ons to be I-mPOSed by this Court. lt I®S further submitted that the petitioner I-S the sole earn[-ng member of his famI'ly, and I|t iS urged to grant pre-arrest, bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.4. ARGUM ENTS OF THE ASS lSTANT PUBLIC PROSEC UTOR 5. Per confra, Ms. P.Akila NaI'du, the learned Assistant public prosecutor, opposed in granting of pre-arrest bail stating that investl-gation I-S not completed; if the petitioner is enlarged on pre-arrest baI-I, he would not be available for the I|nVeStI'gatiOn, and he wi" repeat the same offence,' and I't iS \ urged to dismiss the baI-I application. 6. Perused the record. POINT FOR CO NSID ERATION -fgiv 7. Nowthe pointforconsideration is: t£Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of pro-arrest bail?" ANALYS I 8. This Court granted pre-arrest bail toAccused Nos,5 & 6 vide order dated o1.08.2025 in CrI.P.No.7571/2025. Accused Nos.1 to 3 were granted regular bail by the learned jurisdictional court concerned. 9. ln thI'S CaSe] L.Ws.3 & 4 suffered sI'mPle inJ-urieS, but L.Ws.2 & 5 suffered grievous injury. Allegation against the petI-tiOner and other accused is that all threw cement bricks on the witnesses/victims. There are omnibus allegations --<+,,,,.-. .- ---,.i-_- levelled against the petitioner. There is no specifl'c overt act avttributed against the petitioner bfu¥ any of the victI'mS. So far nine witnesses have been examined. MaterI-al ~P®F±iOn Of the investl'gation is also completed. The i \ I++` Petitioner is aged about 30 years and is working as Software Engineer in HCL _----, -a,-.-.----I .._ `.\ company. 10. Considering the gravity and nature of the allegations alleged against the Petitioner/Accused No.4 and the alleged role specifically played by the Petitioner/Accused No.4, this court is inclined to grLant Pre-arrest bail tO the Petitioner/Accused No.4. CONCLUSION: ll. ln the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner/Accused No.4 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he 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/Accused No.4 shall make himself available for investigation as and when required; iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.4 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecuti-on witnesses; iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.4 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned once in a week i.e., on every saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet. tess-I-` V. VI. To giv? 5. The Petitl-oner/Accused No.4 shall not leave the district limits without the express permission from the station House Officer concerned. The Petitioner/Accused No.4 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. lf he claims that he does not have Passport, he Shall submit an affI'daVit tO that effect to the Investigating Officer. I / sD/-U. SRIDEVl //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT R :TEAcNTTI OR#4oltS)FTIRcAERR TRAR 1. The Station House Officer, Rapthadu Police Station, Ananthapuram Distrl'ct. 2. Two cos to the public Prosecutor, High Court ofAndhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. (OUT) 3. One CC to SrI-AIlu Hari Narayana Advocate [opuc] 4. One spare copy HIGH COURT DR.YLRJ DATE: 21-08-2025 ORDER CRLP.No.8514 of 2025 ALLOWING CRIMINAL PETITION ;J;#:: i I :--.. i+: N€ ®fu :¥;``rdf`=fof`G\` #` l` f=f{:;` i Jt :; i .:.hS\::`l SSf{\l!:\*:rf¥=, ll RAu\ 1\& -----. i-.ii-.i --_---_.--+---- q __,i