APHC010455162025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THETWELFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9051/2025 Between: 1. SHAIK LAL BEE, W/O NAGA DASTHAGIRI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 10-246-2, TEACHERS COLONY, KOTHAPALLI GP, PRODDATUR MANDAL, YSR KADAPA 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. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 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. 5 on bail in crime No. 117 of 2025 of Chapadu Police Station, YSR Kadapa District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 303 (2), 109, 132 and 49 read with Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 20 (1) (C) (ii) (iii) (iv) (vi) (x) and 20 (d) (i) (a) (b) (ii) (a) (b) of A.P. Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016, Rule 3 of A.P. Sandal Wood and Red Sanders Wood Transit Rules, 1969, Section 3 of PDPP Act, 1994, and Section 51 of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. On 24-07-2025 at about 2 p.m. near Nagulapalli Cross, on Proddatur – Mydukur NH Road, Chapadu Mandal, the Sub Inspector of Police, Chapadu Police Station, along with his staff, found and arrested accused Nos. 1 and 2 while the latter were transporting 14 red sander logs, weighing about 281 K.Gs. CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri Sivaprasad Reddy Venati, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is innocentand 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 her family and her 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. 3 4. It is further submitted that the petitioner has permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of her absconding or evading the process of law. The petitioner has cooperated with the investigation so far and 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, petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. 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 yet to be examined. It 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.It is also urged that there exists a real and imminent risk of the petitioners 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. 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both sides.I have perused the entire record. 4 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?” ANALYSIS: 8. The allegation against the petitioner-accused No. 5 is that she had indulged in dealing with 14 logs of red sander wood, weighing about 281 K.Gs. The petitioner is the wife of the main accused. She was spot arrested. She was found in the crime vehicle along with red sander woods. There are six adverse antecedents of similar nature reported against the petitioner. Investigation is still at the nascent stage. Some more material witnesses are to be examined. The period for custodial interrogation is not completed. At this juncture, the request of learned counsel for the petitioner is not found convincing and reasonable to enlarge the petitioner-accused No. 5 on regular bail. There are no merits in the criminal petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. CONCLUSION: 10. The criminal petition is accordingly dismissed. ________________________ Dr. Y.LAKSHMANA RAO, J. Date:12-09-2025, JSK 5 HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE Y.LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9051 OF 2025 DATE: 12-09-2025 JSK