APHC010425472025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8548/2025 Between: TANNERU SURESH, S/O. TANNERY TIRUPATAIAH, AGED 42 YEARS. OCC BUSINESS, R/O.H.NO.20-881 PAPI REDDY COLONY, CHANDA NAGAR, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati Through Dy. Superintendent of Police, CCS, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.JESHTADI SUNIL KUMAR 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.5 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime 2 No.185 of 2025 of Pattabipuram Police Station, Guntur District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 16.01.2025, at Flat No.4B, Kotas Landmark Apartment, 4/2 Lane, SVN Colony, Guntur Town, the accused persons, namely Koteswara Rao (former clerk to the deceased Chukka Ganesh Guptha) and Chiluvuri Prabhakar Rao, in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy, committed offences of criminal breach of trust, forgery, and cheating by fraudulently registering immovable property belonging to a deceased person. The complainant, Mannava Srinivasa Rao, had entered into a transaction in the year 2021 for the purchase of land measuring 3 acres and 2 cents situated at Vijayawada. The said transaction was negotiated through mediators with the then owner, Chukka Ganesh Guptha, for a consideration of Rs.75,50,000/-, which was duly paid. A sale agreement was executed on 17.02.2024, stipulating that the registration of the said land would be completed within 90 days. 3. However, on 22.04.2021, prior to the execution of the sale deed, Chukka Ganesh Guptha and his wife succumbed to COVID-19. Upon learning of their demise, the complainant approached the accused persons, who were associated with the deceased, seeking clarification regarding the status of the property. The accused failed to provide any useful information. Subsequently, 3 the complainant discovered that the accused persons had unlawfully obtained possession of the original title documents of the said property and, in collusion with other unknown individuals, had fabricated documents and forged the signatures of the deceased. They fraudulently registered the property in favour of third parties at the Sub-Registrar Office, Guntur, under Document No.577/2025 dated 16.01.2025, despite the fact that the original owner had passed away on 22.04.2021. Upon discovering the fraudulent registration, the complainant approached the police station on 29.04.2025 at 15:00 hours and lodged a formal complaint. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 4. Sri Jeshtadi Sunil Kumar, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner has not committed any offence; he was falsely implicated in this case; he is ready abide any conditions to be imposed by this Court. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is the sole earning member of his family, and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.4. ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: 5. Per contra, Ms. P.Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of pre-arrest bail stating that investigation is not completed; if the Petitioner is enlarged on pre-arrest bail, he would not be available for the investigation, and he will repeat the same offence; and it is urged to dismiss the bail application. 6. Perused the record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 4 7. Now the point for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioner is entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?” ANALYSIS: 8. The allegation against the Petitioner/Accused No.5 is that he arranged some financial help to Accused No.6 for getting the fake transaction. Based on the confession of Accused No.3, the present Petitioner was shown as Accused No.5. His name is not reflected in the FIR. This Court already granted pre- arrest bail to Accused No.7 vide order dated 08.07.2025 in Crl.P.No.7160/2025. 10. Considering the gravity and nature of the allegations alleged against the Petitioner/Accused No.5 and the alleged role specifically played by the Petitioner/Accused No.5, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.5. CONCLUSION: 11. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. In the event of his arrest, the Petitioner/Accused No.5 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 police officials; ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall make himself available for investigation as and when required; iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; 5 iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 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. v. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall not leave the district limits without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. vi. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 21.08.2025. VTS