APHC010446602025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8887/2025 Between: Nakkala Srinivasu Alias Srinu ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SULTANA SHAIK 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.1 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.78 of 2024 of Coringa Police Station, Kakinada District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 34 (a), read with 34 (1) (2) of Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 (for brevity „the Act‟) read with 7 (1) read with 7 (2) of Andhra Pradesh Regulation of Wholesale Trade and Distribution 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8887 of 2025 Dated 08.09.2025 and Retail Trade in Indian Liquor, Foreign Liquor, Wine and Beer Act, 1993 (for brevity „the Act, 1993‟). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.01.2024 at 2.00 p.m., while Coringa Police were checking the vehicles at Aritikayallanka Village of Tallarevu, one passenger Auto bearing Registration No.AP 05 TC 1106 was plying on that road and when they searched the said auto, they found 240 bottles of 180 MI Mansion House Brandy: 1440 bottles of 180 ML Royal Gold Cup Whisky and that the same were not duty paid. It is also stated that in the said auto, A2 to A4 were found transporting the said liquor bottles. They were taken into custody. During the investigation, they confessed that they were transporting the said seized contraband at the instance of the petitioner herein. As the petitioner apprehends his arrest, the present petition is filed on the ground that he was falsely implicated, even though he is no way concerned with the case and also to A2 to A4. Basing on the report given by the complainant. the present case was registered under Secs. 34 (a) r/w 34(1) (2) of „the Act.,‟ r/w 7 (1) r/w 7(2) of „the Act, 1993‟. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri Shaik Sultana, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged. The Petitioner is the sole earning member of family, and arrest of the petitioner would cause irreparable hardship to dependents of petitioner. The Petitioner is willing to abide by any 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8887 of 2025 Dated 08.09.2025 condition that this Court may deem fit and proper for the grant of anticipatory bail. The Petitioner has got fixed abode. 4. It is further submitted that there is no recovery attributable to the Petitioner and custodial interrogation is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Petitioner has cooperated with the investigation and there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Therefore, it is prayed that this Court may be pleased to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.1 in the interest of justice. ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: 5. Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed granting of pre-arrest bail contending that the 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 co-operate with the investigation and may evade the process of law. 6. It is further urged that there exists a real likelihood of committing similar offences, if granted pre-arrest bail. 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, and it is prayed that the instant bail application be dismissed. 7. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8887 of 2025 Dated 08.09.2025 POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 8. 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 pre-arrest bail?” ANALYSIS: 9. As per the record, the allegations against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 are that he purchased 1,618 bottles of liquor and was selling them in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The involvement of the Petitioner/Accused No.1 came to light based on the confessional statements of Accused Nos. 2 to 4. There are no similar adverse antecedents reported against the Petitioner. So far, thirteen witnesses have been examined, and substantial portion of the investigation has been completed. The Petitioner is a permanent resident of Ganapati Nagar, Mettakurru, Yanam, Puducherry. He has got fixed abode. It is contended that the petitioenr was falsely implicatged by other accused, because of previous animosity against the petitioner. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances, the gravity and nature of the allegations leveled the Petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.1. 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.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a personal bond for a 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8887 of 2025 Dated 08.09.2025 sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall make himself available for investigation as and when required; iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 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.1 shall not leave the district limits without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. vi. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claim that he does not have passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date:08.09.2025. KMS 6 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.8887 of 2025 Dated 08.09.2025 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.8887 of 2025 Date:08.09.2025 KMS