lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9039 OF 2025 Between : \`. ~ 1. Pala Rammohan, S/o. P.Subbaramaiah, Aged 37 years, R/o. 23/27, Bandivandlapalli Village, Machireddygaripalli Panchayath, T.Sundupalli MandaI, Annamayya District:-a 2. Makula Jameer @ Bathala Raju, S/o. M.Moulali, Aged 21 years, R/o. 8/141, Water Tank Street, Masapet, Rayachoti Town, Annamayya District. ...Petitioners/Accused No.4 & 5 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, At Amaravati. ...Respondent Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS, is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the groinnds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioners/accused no. 4 & 5 on bail, pending investigatl'on, inquiry and trial in OR.No.16/2025-26 of Bhakarapeta Range. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri D.Purna Chandra Reddy, Acivocate for the Petitioners and of Public Prosecutor for Respondent, the Court made the following ORDER: ThI'S Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the petitioners- accused Nos. 4 and 5 on bail I-n O.R.No. 16/2025-26 of F.R.O., Bhakarape{a Rangae, Tirupati Division, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20 (1) (c) (ii) (iii) (iv), 29 (2) (b), 29 (4) (a) (i), 29 (4) (b), 32-A, 32-B and 32-C ofA.P. Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016, Rule 3 ofA.P. Sandal Wood and Red Sanders Wood Transit Rules, 1969, Sections 27 and 29 of Wildlife Protection Act,1972, and Sections 303, 331 and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. On 28-07-2025 at about 9 p.m. at Siddulagandi Cheruvu location, Compartment No. 28, Talakona Reserve Forest, Talakona North Beat, accused Nos. 3 to 5 were found and arrested while they were transporting o8 red sander logs, weighing about 156 K.Gs., in Hyundai Santro Car bearing registration No, AP20HO135. CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri D.Purna Chandra Reddy, learned counsel forthe petitioners, submits that the petitioners are I'nnOCentS and have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the petitioners are the sole breadwI-nnerS Of their families and their arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to the dependents of the •) E .7 PetI-tI'OnerS. The petitioners undertake to abide by any conditI-On that this Court may impose while granting bail to the petl-tioners. 4. lt is further submitted that the petitioners have permanent places of residence and there is no likeII'hOOd Of them absconding or evading the process of law. The petitioners have cooperated with the investigation thus far and assure 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 Its imposed While granting the bail, petitioners would not violate it; and it is urged {o allow the pe{jtion. ARGUIVIENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per confra, Ms. Akhila Naidu, learned AssI'Stant Public Prosecutor, strenuously opposed the grant of baI'I, contending that the investigation is still underway and several materI-al witnesses are yet to be examined. It is submitted that enlargement of the petitioners on bail at this stage would seriously hamper the progress of the investigation and may result in non- cooPeratI'On from the Petitioners. The prosecution further apprehends that the petitioners, I'f released, may influence or intimidate wl'tnesses, thereby obstructI'ng the COurSe Of juStiCe. It is also urged that there exists a real and immI-nent risk Of the Petitioners abSCOndI'ng and evading the due process of law. i-`:\.``` Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the infiggrity of the investigation, it is submI-tted that the petitioners do not deserve the discretionary relief of bail and it is urged {o dismI'SS the bail petition. 4 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. ln the light of the case c>f the prosecution and the contentions of learned counsel for both the sides, now the point for consI'deratiOn iS: "Whether the petitioners are entitled for grant of bail?" ANALYSIS: 8. The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 allegedly indulged in dealing with 08 logs of red sander woods, weighing about 156 K.Gs. The petitioners allegedly acted as coolies for cutting down red sander trees and converting them into wood and shifting into vehicle for transportation. The petitioners were arrested on 28LO7-2025. They have been in judicial custody for the past 43 days. The petitioner-accused No. 4 has been suffering from Mouth Cancer. All the witnesses are official witnesses. Material portion of the investigation is completed. prime witnesses are examined. The petitioner-accused No. 4 is permanent resident of Bandivandlapalli Village, MachireddygaripaIIi Panchayat, T.SundupaIIi Mandal, Annamayya District, and the petitioner-accused No. 5 is permanent resident of Masapet, Rayacho{i Town, Annamayya District. They have got fixed abode. For the sake of daily coolie, they had been engaged for transportation of red sander wood. CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the nature and gravI'ty Of allegations levelled against the Petitioners, their alleged role played I'n this Case, and the period of detention undergone by the petitI'OnerS, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bal'l with the following stringent conditions: (i) The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 shall be enlarged on bail subject to their executing each a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for the ll'ke sum each to the satisfaction of learned Judge, Special Court for trial of Red Sanders Smuggling Cases, Tirupati,- (ii) The petitioners-ac`cused Nos. 4 and 5 shall appear before the Forest Range Officer, Bhakarapeta Range, on every saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm till cognizance is taken by learned trial Court,I (iii) The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Forest Range Officer, Bhakarapeta Range; (iv) The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future; (v) The petitioners-accused Mos. 4 and 5 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case <\ _`.. and shall make themselves available for I'nterrOgatiOn by the investigating offI-Cer aS and When requl'red; (vl') The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 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 petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 shall surrender their Passports, if any, tO the investigating OffI'Cer. If they claim that they do not have a passport, they shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating officer. 10. The criminal petition is accordingly allowed. //TRUE COPY// SD/-G.HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR sECTIOff{?FFICER To, 1. The Judge, Special Court for Trial of Red Sanders Smuggling Cases, Tirupati. 2. The Judicial Magistrate of lst Class for trial of cases relating to Red Sanders Smuggling, Tirupathi. 3. The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Tirupati. 4. The Forest Range Officer, Bhakarapeta Range, Tirupati. 5. One CC to Sri D.Purna Chandra Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs toPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P., Amaravati. [OUT] HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATE : 09/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.9039 of 2025 ALLOWED