APHC010436702025 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: 8889/2025 Between: Eppe Narasappa ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. K NARSI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. 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.1 on bail in Crime No.97 of 2025 of Ananthapuram 4th Town Police Station, Ananthapuram District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 herein for the offence punishable under Sections 126 (2), 140 (4), 308 (5), 118 (1), 115 (2) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8889 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. Material averments stemming from the prosecution are that on 05.05.2025 at about 8:30 PM near Razak Hospital, Kalyanadurgam Road, Ananthapuramu Town, the complainant Bandaru Murali Krishna (37 yrs, painter, resident of Ananthapuramu) was forcibly kidnapped by A1 Narasappa, A2 Naresh, A3 Ram Mohan, and A4 Mabu Peera in a car (AP16-EZ-1411) with the involvement of A5 Aswini. The background is that the complainant had earlier developed familiarity with Aswini, who was in an extramarital relationship with A1 Narasappa. Despite her warnings not to contact her, the complainant occasionally continued communication, which led to Narasappa’s suspicion. On 05.05.2025, Aswini called the complainant to the RTC Bus Stand, from where she asked him to drop her at Atmakur. While proceeding, the accused intercepted his auto, kidnapped him, abused him, snatched his phone, and assaulted him with fists and a stick, causing injuries. Later, they left him at PTC flyover and fled. The complainant then lodged a report, leading to registration of the case. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri K. Narsi 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 and his 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8889 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any condition that this Court may impose while granting bail to the Petitioner. 4. It is further submitted that the Petitioner has a permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of his absconding or evading the process of law. The Petitioner has cooperated with the investigation so far and assures continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of such a nature that do not warrant for further custodial detention, 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 STATE: 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 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 the investigation, it 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8889 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 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: 7. As seen from the record, the de-facto complainant suffered simple injuries. This Court has already enlarged Accused Nos.2 to 5 on bail in Crl.P.No.7703 of 2025. The petitioner had earlier filed Crl.P.No.7690 of 2025, which was dismissed as not pressed. The petitioner was arrested on 25.06.2025 and has been in judicial custody for the past 77 days. Material witnesses are examined. Prime portion of investigation completed. CONCLUSION: 8. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioner, his alleged role played in this case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject to them 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 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8889 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 Magistrate of I Class for Prohibition and Excise Case, Ananthapuramu. ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the Station House Officer, Ananthapuram 4th Town Police Station, Ananthapuram District, 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.1 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 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.1 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not 6 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8889 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 09.09.2025 KMS 7 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8889 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.8889 of 2025 Date:09.09.2025 KMS