'Z [3521 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8619 OF 2025 s N A'C, .r «=» 0 * .,14 1 Between: % ‘‘k,* Asif All Khan, S/o. Abdul Razak Khan, Aged 50 years, R/o. Adagarakalahalli ' Village, Saiiapur Hoble, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, Karnataka State. Petitioner/Accused No.22 The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, At Amaravati. AND Respondent/Complainant Petition under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C(New Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,2023), is filed praying that in the circums^tances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court petitioner/accused may be pleased to release the no. 22 on bail, pending investigation, inquiry and trial in Crime No. 91/2016 of Lakkireddipalle Police Station YSR Kadapa District. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri D PURNACHANDRA REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent, the Court made the following ORDER the APHC010429832025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8619/2025 Between: Asif Ali Khan ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: D. Purnachandra Reddy Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: Public Prosecutor The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.22 on bail in Cr.No.91 of 2016 of Lakireddypalli Police Station, YSR Kadapa District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 379, 353, 307, 120(B), 109 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘the I.P.C’), Section 20(1)(c)(ii)(iii)(iv)(x), Section 20(d)(i)(a)(b)(2)(a)(b) 29(2)(b)(4)(a)(i)(ii)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 2016 (for brevity ‘the and Section m 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8619 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 Act’) Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Sandal Wood and Red Sanders Wood Transit Rules, 1969 (for brevity ‘the Rules’), Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (for brevity ‘the Act’) and Section 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 (for brevity ‘the Act’). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: The case of the prosecution is that on 26.12.2016, the Sub-Inspector of 2. Lakkireddipalle Police Station received credible information about illegal transportation of red senders. At about 2:45 PM, near Gundala Ganta Cross, the police found several persons carrying red sender logs to load into a Scorpio vehicle. On seeing the police, the offenders abandoned the logs pelted stones at the police, and some escaped in the Scorpio. The police apprehended one accused, who confessed his role, and seized 11 red sander logs. Based on the panchanama, a case in Cr.No.91/2016 was registered for offences under Sections 147, 148, 379, 353, 307, 120-B, 109 r/w 149 IPC, provisions of the A.P. Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016, A.P. Sandalwood and Red Sanders Transit Rules, 1969, PDPP Act, 1984, and Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and investigation was taken up. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri D. Puma Chandra Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking him to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the Petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8619of2025 Dated 09.09.2025 and his arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any condition that this Court impose while granting bail to the Petitioner. may It is further .submitted that the Petitioner has a permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of him absconding or evading the process of law. The Petitioner has cooperated with the investigation thus far and assures continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant custodial interrogation, and if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, Petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: 4. 5. Per contra, Ms.P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor strenuously opposed the grant of bail, contending that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses are yet to be examined. It is submitted that enlargement of the Petitioner on bail at this stage would seriously hamper the progress of the investigation and may result in non cooperation from the Petitioner.The prosecution further apprehends that the Petitioner, if released, may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby obstructing the course of justice. It is also urged that there exists a real and imminent risk of the Petitioner absconding and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the integrity of 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8619 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioner does not deserve the discretionary relief of bailand it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 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 Petitioner is entitled for grant of bail? ANALYSIS: As seen from the record, the allegation against the petitioner/Accused No.22 is that he, along with 26 others, dealt with 11 logs of red senders weighing about 150 kgs. The petitioner’s alleged involvement came to light based on the confession of Accused No.1. The FIR was registered 26.12.2016. It has been shown that the petitioner was absconding ever since. The charge sheet was filed and numbered as P.R.C. No.700 of 2023, wherein 27 persons were arrayed as accused. The petitioner' was arrested 16.07.2025 and has been in judicial custody for the past 54 days. Though the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contends that the petitioner was involved in 10 similar cases in 2016 and one case in 2024 for the alleged offences under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC, it is a settled principle that the petitioner is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The petitioner is aged about 50 years and is a permanent resident of Adagarakalahalli Village, Sajjapur Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, Karnataka State, having a fixed place of residence. Keeping the 7. on on 8. 5 / Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8619 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 petitioner for an indefinite period in judicial custody, despite filing of the charge sheet wherein large number of accused shown therein, would not augurary purpose and also be proper. CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioner, his alleged role played in this case, and the period of detention undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions; The petitioner/Accused No.22 shall be enlarged on bail I. subject to he executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class for Trial of Cases Relating to Red Sanders Smuggling, Tirupati. The petitioner/Accused No.22 shall appear before the Station House Officer, Lakireddypalli Police Station, YSR Kadapa Distric, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner/Accused No.22 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. 6 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8619 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 The petitioner/Accused No.22shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. The petitioner/Accused No.22 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. petitioner/Accused No.22 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer, vii. The petitioner/Accused No.22 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claim that he do not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. IV. V. The VI. 10. Sd/~ K.TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// For i The Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for trail of cases relating to Red Sander Smuggling, Tirupati. 2. The Superintendent, District jail, Chittoor. , 3 The SHO Lakkireddipalle Police Station YSR Kadapa District. 4 OneCCto SRI D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Advocate [OPUC] s'. Two CCS to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P [OPUC] 6. One spare copy To, 1. I high court dr.ylr,j DATED: 09/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.8619 of 2025 ALLOWED 'll SEP® ^PATC^ C3 rr*' cnt ★