APHC010453482025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9052/2025 Between: M Thippeswamy @ Thippaiah and others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): Jithendra. P Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 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 Petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.90 of 2025 of Vajrakarur Police Station, Ananthapuramu District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 75, 108 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9052 of 2025 Dated 12.09.2025 CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Accused No.1 allegedly misbehaved with the complainant by hugging her from behind. The complainant is said to have resisted the act and returned to her house. It is further alleged that thereafter, all the accused, including these petitioners, went near the complainant’s house at about 11:00 p.m. and abused her husband in filthy language. On account of such alleged abuse, the complainant’s husband consumed pesticide and committed suicide at about 11:30 p.m. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS: 3. Sri Jithendra Palyam, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and have not committed any offence as alleged. The Petitioners are the sole earning members of their family, and their arrest would cause irreparable hardship to their dependents. The Petitioners are willing to abide by any condition that this Court may deem fit and proper for the grant of anticipatory bail. The Petitioners have got fixed abode. 4. It is further submitted that there is no recovery attributable to the Petitioners and custodial interrogation is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Petitioners have 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 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9052 of 2025 Dated 12.09.2025 grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6 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 Petitioners are imperative for eliciting material facts. It is submitted that if the Petitioners are granted pre-arrest bail, there is a grave apprehension that they may not cooperate with the investigation and may evade the process of law. 6. The prosecution also apprehends that the Petitioners 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 further submits that L.Ws.1 to 4 are the eye-witnesses they spoke about the alleged offence and urged to dismiss the petition. 7. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. 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 Petitioners are entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?” ANALYSIS: 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9052 of 2025 Dated 12.09.2025 9. As seen from the record, the allegations against the petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6 are that, along with some other accused, they went to the house of Bala Thimmaraju and insulted him by alleging that the de-facto complainant herself was attracting one of the accused. As a result, Bala Thimmaraju felt insulted and humiliated, went into his house, consumed pesticide, and committed suicide. 10. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity and nature of the allegations leveled the Petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6. CONCLUSION: 11. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. In the event of their arrest, the Petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6 shall be enlarged on bail subject to them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; ii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6 shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required; iii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9052 of 2025 Dated 12.09.2025 iv. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6 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 Petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6 shall not leave the district limits without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. vi. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5, and 6 shall surrender their passports, if any, to the investigating officer. If they claim that they do not have passports, they shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 12.09.2025. KMS 6 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9052 of 2025 Dated 12.09.2025 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.9052 of 2025 Date:12.09.2025 KMS