IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [ 3521IJI WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8900 OF 2025 Hi fk t i 4:' t /X; '.y Between: Nallapareddy Ajit Kumar Reddy @ Nallapureddy Ajith Reddy, S/o Chandrasekhar Reddy Hindu, Aged about 52 years. Business R/o Karedu Village Ulavapadu Mandal Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh Petitioner/Accused no 11 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented Public Prosecutor, AP High Court Buildings at Amaravathi, through the Station House Officer Kaligiri Police Station SPSR Nellore District Respondent/Complainant Petition under Sections 480 & 483 of BNSS (Old Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C), praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in Cr. No. 5/2025 of Kaligiri P.S., U/s 324(4), 329(3), and 303(2) of BNS, Section 20(1)(d)(i) r/w Section 20(1)(C)(ii)(iii) (iv)(ix)(x) Andhra Pradesh Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016; Section 36 r/w Section of the Andhra Pradesh Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016; Section 55(2) r/w Sections 3, 4, and 6 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002; and Section 3(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Sandal Wood and Red Sanders Wood Transit 1969, in the interest of justice. of the 32(A) Rules, The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri AMANCHARLA SATISH BABU, Advocate for the Petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent and the Court made the following; 2 ORDER: This criminal petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the petitioner- accused No. 11 on bail in crime No. 5 of 2025 of Kaligiri Police Station, S.P.S.R. Nellore District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324 (4), 329 (3) and 303 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: On 25-01-2025 at 9.30 p.m., the accused criminally trespassed into Agrigold Lands (attached to CID) situated in survey No. 95 of Dubagunta Village, Kaligiri Manal, SPSR Nellore District, and cut and committed theft of 5 2. red Sander trees, worth of Rs.60,000/-. CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri K.S.Murthy, learned senior counsel, representing Sri Amancharla Satish Babu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. without any cogent evidence linking to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and his arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to the dependents of the petitioner. 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 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 3 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, the petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: Per contra, Ms.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, submitted that enlargement of the petitioner on bail at this stage would seriously hamper the progress of the investigation and may result in 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 is submitted that the petitioner does not deserve the discretionary relief of bail and it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 5. It is non- 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 7. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of learned counsel for both sides, now the point for consideration is: Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail? 4 ANALYSIS: The allegation against the petitioner-accused No. 11 is that he along with other accused trespassed into the land and got cut down five trees of red Sander wood into ten logs, weighing about 278.3 K.Gs. Indeed, this land is not belonging to Forest Department. The land pertains to Agrigold Company. The trees are 15 years old. The role of the present petitioner had come out based on the confession of accused No. 3. The petitioner was arrested on 05- 08-2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 37 days. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the period for police custody was also over. 8. CONCLUSION: Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and 9. gravity of allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions: The petitioner-accused No. 11 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the (i) satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Kavali; (ii) The petitioner-accused No. 11 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm till cognizance is taken by learned trial Court; 5 (iii) The petitioner-accused No. 11 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned; The petitioner-accused No. 11 shall not commit or indulge (iv) in commission of any offence in future; (V) The petitioner-accused No. 11 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. 11 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; and (vii) The petitioner-accused No. 11 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. The criminal petition is accordingly allowed. 10. CT/ON OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To. 1. The (Remand Court) Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kavali 2. The Additional District & sessions Judge for trial of Red Sanders Smuggling Cases :: TIRUPATI 3. The Superintendent, Nellore Central Jail 4. The Station House Officer, Kaligiri Police Station 5. One CC to SRI. AMANCHARLA SATISH BABU Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT] 7. One spare copy Nellore District SPSR Nellore District KJ HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED: 10/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.8900 of 2025 ALLOWED >/ m 1 ) atc5