APHC010443522025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8834/2025 Between: 1.BOMMISETTY SAI KUMAR @ SAI, S/O. B. SRINIVASARAO @ TELIA SREENU, AGED 27 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 20-3-82/A, ROLLA BAZAR, NARASARAOPETA TOWN, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.I.M.S PRAKASH 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.3 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with in Crime No.75 of 2024 of Narasaraopet I Town Police Station, Palnadu District 2 registered against the petitioner/Accused No.3 for the offences punishable under Sections 118 (2) read with Section 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 04.07.2024 at about 17:00 hours, the complainant, Alluri Hari Krishna, was present at the residence of MLA Aravind Babu, Prakash Nagar, Narasaraopet Town, in connection with his work. At that time, a group of accused persons namely Prasad, Suresh, Sai (S/o Tella Sreenu), Rajesh, Ankamma Raju, Kalee (S/o Counsellor Ankamma Raju), Prem Kumar, Naveen, Pakeer’s son, Bottu Sai, and others arrived on motorcycles, armed with sticks, rods, and knives. They allegedly caused damage to property and created public panic. The complainant was then assaulted with rods and sticks, resulting in a fracture to his left knee and bleeding injuries to his back and head. He was subsequently identified and assisted by one Suresh, who admitted him to Seshadri Hospital. 3. Mr. I.M.S.Prakash, the learned counsel for the petitioner/Accused No.3 contends that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated by the police due to political vendetta. It is further submitted that petitioner/Accused No.3 is permanent resident of Narsaraopeta Town, Palnadu District and undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and it is urged to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.3 on bail 4. Per contra, Ms. P.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed granting of pre-arrest bail contending that the 3 investigation is at a nascent stage and the custodial interrogation of the Petitioner is imperative for eliciting material facts. It is submitted that if the Petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail, there is a grave apprehension that he may not cooperate with the investigation and may evade the process of law. 5. The prosecution also apprehends that the Petitioner may influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, thereby obstructing the fair and impartial investigation. In view of the seriousness of the allegations and the potential risk to the progress of the investigation, it is prayed that the instant bail application be dismissed. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/Accused No.3 and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 7. The learned XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet granted pre-arrest bail to Accused Nos.1 & 4 in Crl.M.P.No.532/2024 in Cr.No.75/2024 of Narasaraopet I Town Police Station, on the file of the learned I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Narasaraopet. 8. The allegations against the Petitioner/Accused No.3 are that he along with other accused being led by Accused No.1 by actively participating in the alleged attack caused several injuries including grievous injuries to the de- facto complainant. There are several specific overt acts attributed against the Petitioner. Therefore, there are no merits in the case to consider the request of the Petitioner/Accused No.3 for grant of pre-arrest bail. Hence, the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 4 9. However, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner requests this Court to grant liberty to the Petitioner to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned and move an appropriate application for his release before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the Petitioner/Accused No.3 to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned within a period of one week from the date of this order and move an appropriate application before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned for enlarging them on bail. The learned Jurisdictional Court concerned shall consider such application on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law, after affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the learned Public Prosecutor. The said application shall be disposed of expeditiously, preferably within a period of two (02) days from the date of its filing. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 11.09.2025 VTS