APHC010438332025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI p MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER ok X % I s TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE a V 4 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NOS: 8993 AND 9250 OF 2025 CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8993 OF 2025 Between: Gunnuri Ashok, S/o. Nagayya, Aged about 41 years, Occ R/o D. No. 10-384, Bhavani puram Konthamuru Village, Rajamahendravaram Rural. ...Petitioner/Accused - 4 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, through Rajanagaram Police station. East Godavari District Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Amaravati ...Respondent Petition under Section 482 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on surrender before the Principal Junior Civil Judge Cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class Rajamahendravaram on the event of arrest to enlarge the petitioner on bail in FIR. No 287 of 2025 dated 20-07-2025 registered U/S Sec 331(4) 305(a) BNS of Rajanagaram PS North Zone, East Godavari District, Rajamahendravaram and till such time the petitioner accused further prays that not to take any coercive action against the petitioner accused -A4. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAJESH KUMAR B. Counsel for the Respondent: ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9250 OF 2025 APHC010462072025 Between: Gunnuri Ashok, S/o. G.Nagayya, Aged about 41 years, Occ: Education consutancy, R/o D.No. 10-384, Bhavanipuram Konthamuru Village, Rajamahendravaram Rural, ...Petitioner/Accused A-6 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, The State of Andhra Pradesh through Rajanagaram Police Station, East Godavari District, Rep by Its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Amaravati-AP ...Respondent Petition under Section 482 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail before the Principal Junior Civil Judge Cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class Rajamahendravarm on the event of arrest in FIR. No 305 of 2025 dated 03-08-2025 which is read U/S Sec 331(4) 305(a) BNS of BNS of Rajanagaram P.S, North Zone, East I Godavari District, Rajamahendravaram and till such time the petitioner prays not to take any coercive action. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAJESH KUMAR B. Counsel for the Respondent: ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the followingorder: APHC010438332025. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8993/2025 Between: Gunnuri Ashok ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.RAJESH KUMAR B Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 APHC010462072025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9250/202^ Between: Gunnuri Ashok ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.RAJESH KUMAR B Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following; ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 3 f COMMON ORDER: Criminal Petition No. 8993 of 2025 has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'the B.N.S.S.'), seeking for granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner-accuse d No. 4 in crime No. 287 of 2025 of Rajanagaram Police Station, East Godavari District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 331 (4) and 305 (a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'the B.N.S.'). 2. Criminal Petition No. 9250 of 2025 has been filed under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. seeking for granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner-accused No. 6 in crime No. 305 of 2025 of Rajanagaram Police Station, East Godavari District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 331 (4) and 305 (a) of the B.N.S. 3. Both these criminal petitions are heard together and disposed of by way of this common order in as much as the petitioner in the two cases is one and the same but the crimes are different. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION IN CRIMINAL PETITION No. 8993 OF 2025: 4. On 15-07-2025 at about 10 a.m., de facto complainant and his family members left their house by locking all the doors and went to Srisailam. After completion of devotional trip, on 20-07-2025, he and his family members returned back and noticed that door locks were broken. They went inside the house and noticed that 18 sovereigns of gold ornaments and 3.5 K.Gs. of silver articles were missing. 4 CASE OF THE PROSECtiTIQN IN CRIMimai On 03-05-2025 guest house by locking doors. On 03-08-2025 complainant came to the guest house doors was broken. He went inside the worth of Rs.80,000/- were missing. PETITION No. 9250 OF 2025! 5. evening, de facto complainant and his owner left the at about 10 a.m., de facto and observed that lock of the main guest house and noticed that articles CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSFI Fnp Sri B.Rajesh Kumar, learned IHE PETITIONFRR- 6. counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated iin the alleged offence. without any cogent evidence linking to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the petitioner is the soie breadwinner of his family and arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice his to the dependents of the any condition that this Court petitioner. The petitioner undertakes to abide by may impose while granting bail to the petitioner. 7. It is further submitted that the residence and there is petitioner has permanent place of no likelihood of him absconding or evading the process are of a nature that do not warrant IS imposed while granting the bail, the petitioner would not violate It; and it is urged to allow the petition. Of law. It is also urged that the allegations custodial interrogation, and if any condition is i ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE; Por contra, Ms. Akhila Naidu strenuously opposed the investigation is still underway and several 8. learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, grant of pre-arrest bail. contending that the material witnesses are yet to be 5 examined.lt 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.lt 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 is submitted that the petitioner doesnot deserve the discretionary relief of bailand it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 9. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both sides.I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSiPERATiON: In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of learned counsel for both sides, now the point for consideration is: 10. Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail? ANALYSIS: The Sections of law for the alleged offences registered against the petitioner are 331 (4) and 305 (a) of 'the B.N.S'. Oh perusal of the allegations levelled against the petitioner. Sections 305 (a) and 331 (4) of 'the B.N.S.' would squarely applicable. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had received stolen property knowing that the property has been stolen. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner was served a notice under Section 35 (3) of 'the 11. 6 B.N.S.S; in crime No. 305 of 2025 and charge sheet has also Whereas in crime No. 287 of 2025 when police tried to petitioner under Section 35 (3) of 'the B.N.S.S.', learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the petitioner had not been filed, serve notice on the as per the submission of cooperated to get that notice served. In crime No. 287 of 2025, no charge sheet has been filed. 12. It is to be pointed that the petitioner, without approaching learned Sessions Judge at the first instance seeking for grant of pre-arrest bail, has directly approached this Court. Of course, this Court has got concurrent jurisdiction to entertain a pre-arrest bail petition. However, to exercise that jurisdiction, the petitioner has to establish a special case or an extraordinary circumstance. A perusal of the averments of the petition, no such ground has been shown or established. However, petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than as the offences alleged against the seven years, the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of Section 35 (3) of 'the B.N.S.S'. 13. In this regard, it is apposite to mention the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar\ wherein detailed issued at Para Nos. 11 and 12, for arresting reproduced herein below; guidelines were a person, which are being 11^0ur endeavor in this judgment is to ensure that police officers do not arrest accused unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorize detention casually and mechanically In order to ensure what we have observed above, we give the followina direction: a).All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity ’(2014) 8 see 273 7 for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.RC.’); b)AII police officers be provided with a check list containing specified sub- clauses under Section 41 (1)(b)(ii); c) The police officer shall forward the check list duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention; d) The Magistrate while authorizing detention of the accused shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorize detention; e) The decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing; f) Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41-A of Cr.RC be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing; g) Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, he shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be Instituted before High Court having territorialjurisdiction, h) Authorizing detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court. 12. We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the I..PC. or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years; whether with or without fine. 14. The similar view is also reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Md. AsfakAlam v. State of Jharkhand^, which also reiterated the guidelines laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar. 2(2023) 8 see 632 8 15. In the light of the law laid down in the cases of >ilmesh Kumar and Md. AsfakAlam, the investigating officer is under legal obligation to proceed in accordance with law but he shall follow Sections 41 and 41(A) of ‘the Cr.P.C.’ B.N.S.S.'). The petitioner shall oblige to ongoing investigation. In the result, the criminal petitions are disposed of directing Investigating Officer to comply with Section 35 (3) of 'the BNSS741-A of 'the Cr.P.C.,' and to strictly follow the directions issued in the cases of Amesh Kumar and MD. AsfakAlam. the procedure prescribed (now Sections 35 and 35 (3) of ‘the render his fullest cooperation in the under 16. the Sd/- M SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// K SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Junior Civil Judge Cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class Rajamahendravaram House Officer, Rajanagaram P.S North Zone, East Godavari District, Rajamahendravaram 3. One CC to Sri Rajesh Kumar B., Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCS to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P., Amaravati [OUT] 2. The Station 5. Two CD Copies SRL VNA high court DATED:! 5/09/2025 COMMON ORDER CRLP Nos. 8993 AND 9250 OF 2025 5 ? 0 SEP 2025 f ^ Current Secuon disposing of the criminal petitions