[3521 I IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl TUESDAY ,THE NiNTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PFaESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA R CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9038 OF 2025 Between : 1. Etla Venkata Durgarao, Aged about 31 years, R/o. D.No. 42-46-3, Block No. 46, Luna Center, Ajith Singh Nagar, Ramalayam Back Sides Vijayawada urban, vijayawacia, Krishna District. 2. Badam Jayakrishna, S/o. Fa?jQndra Prasad, Aged about 35 Years, R/o. 42-40-16, BIock No. 40,T Ajith singh Nagar, Vijayawada Urban, Vijayawada, Krishna Dl-st-rii}t+.I ` 3. Etla Chandrasekhar, s/o. E.z-+N'agaraju, Aged about 29 years, R/o. D.No. 42-46-3, BIock No. 46, Luna- Center, Ajith Singh Nagar, Ramalayam Back Side, ViJ-ayaWada urban, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 4. Tirumalareddy venkatesh, s/o. Tirumalareddy Raju, Aged about 32 years, R/o. D.No. 42-16-4,-Bio~ck No. 69, AJ'ith SI-ngh Nagar, Vijayawada Urban, Vijayawada, Krishna'`Di;trict. Petitioners/A-3,4,6 and 7 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through Station House Officer, Ajith Singh Nagar Police statio`n-, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravati. Respondent Petition under section 4'82 'of BNSS is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affida'vit filed in support of the criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased td ienlarge the antici-patory bail in the event of arrest of the Petitioners/A-3, 4, 6 arid 7 in FIR No.318/2025, Dt.15.08.2025 on the fl-Ie ofAjith Singh Nagar Police Station, NTR Commissionerate DistrI-Ct. The petition/Appeal coming on fror hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed in support -th6reof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri SUBRAHMANYAM KOTARi Advocate for the petitioner9 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) for the Respondent and the court macie the following. APHCO10454902025 • 1fiELH IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI - (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9038/2025 Between : Etla Venkata Durgarao and Others AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. SUBRAHMANYAM KOTARI [3521] ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) u.RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 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 Sanhi{a, 2023 (for brevity {the BNSS]) by the Petitioners/Accused. Nos.3, 4, 6, an d7 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.318 of 2025 of Ajith Singh Nagar Police Station, NTR Commissionerate District, registered for the alleged offence punis'hable under Sections 115 (2),118 (1) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023` (for brevity {the BNSJ). '\..\.\ Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9038 of 2025 Dated 09.O9.2025 CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 14.08.2025 at about 8:00 PM near Luna Center, Ajith Singh Nagar, Vijayawada, the complainant]s brother Sai Kumar was assaulted by Durga Rao and Yesu. When the complainant ® rushed to the spot and questioned them, Yesu struck him on the back of the head with a stone, and Durga Rao beat him with a stick on his shoulder, wrist, and leg, while others kicked him, causing ble6ding injuries. Durga Rao also hit Sai Kumar on the forehead with a stick, and Yesu struck his face and nose, I resulting in further bleed`ing injuries. Onlookers gathered, and the accused fled. The complainant and Sai Kumar were shifted to GGH, Vijayawada, in a 108 ambulance. Based on his report, the present case was registered. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS: 3. Sri Subramanyam Kotari, learned counsel. for the Petitioners respectfully e submit that the petitioners have been falsely implicat'ed 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 dependent's. The Petitioners are willing to abide by any I condition that this Court may deem fit and proper for the grant of anticipatory bail. The Petitioners have got fixed abode. 4. lt is further submitted that there is no recovery attributable to the Petitiomers and custoc!ial 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 + {i-rd 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9038 of2025 Dated 09.09.2O25 prosecution evidenlce. Therefore, it is prayed that this Court may be pleased to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner Nos.1 {o 7/Accused No.1, 2, 6 to 10 in I.he 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 contend-Ing that the investigation is a{ a nascent stage and the custodial interrogation of the petit'loners are imperative for eliciting material facts. It is submitted that 'lf the petitioners are granted pre-arrest bail, there is a gra`ve apprehension that they / may not cooperate with the investigation and may evade the process of law. 6. ]t is further urged that there exists a real l'[kelihOOd Of committing Sim-llar offences the petitioners are granted pre-arrest bail. The prosecution also apprehends that the pet'lt|IOnerS may influence witnesses or tamper with a evidence, thereby obstructing the fair and impartial investigation. In view of the ser-lousness of the allegat-Ions and the potential risk to the integrity of the invest-lgation, it -ls 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 tr`'1e entire reCOrC!. I POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 8. ln 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: 6£Whether the Petitioners are entitled for grant of pro-arrest bail?99 * -~ ..I _ 3ffi \ a _ _ \\ Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9038 of2025 Dated 09.09.2O25 ANALYSIS: 9. As seen from the record, there are specific overt acts attributed by the de-facto complainant in his statement recorded by the police. The de-facto complainant alleged that Accused No.3 beat him with a stick and hands all over his body. Accused No.3 also assaulted the complainantJs brother, sai Kumar, with a stone on his forehead, causing bleeding injuries. considering the gravity and nature of the allegations against petitioner No.1/Accused No.3, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail. Hence, the petition filed by Petitioner No.1/Accused No.3' is dismissed. I 10. L.Ws.3 and 4, who are eyewitnesses, corroborated the versioh of L.Ws.fl and 2 in material particulars. L.W.1 suffered simple injuries, while L.W.2 sustained grievous injuries a{ the hands of Accused No.3 and others. Consequently, the section of law has been altered from Section 118(1) of [the BNS.,I to Section 118(2) of fthe BNSJ. ll. Insofar as the allegations against Petitioner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.4, 6, and 7 are concerned, they are omnibus in nature. Considering the gravity and nature of the allegations against them, this Court inclines to grant pre- arrest bail to petitioner Mos.2 to 4/Accused Mos.4, 6, and 7., CONCLUSION: 12. ln the result, the Criminal Petition is partly al!owec! with the following conclitions: i. In the event.of their arrest, the Petitioner Nos.2 io 4/Accusecl Mos.4, 6, ancl 7 shall be enlarged on' bail subject to them J=-- I 5 Dr,YLR, J Crl.P.No.9038 of2025 Dated 09.09.2025 executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction Qf the arresting POliCe Officials; I ii. The Petitioner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.4-, 6, and 7 shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required; iii. The Petitioner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos,4, 6, and 7 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution I witnesses; iv. The Petitioner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.4, 6, and 7 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. I v. The Petitioner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.4, 6, and 7 shall not leave the district limits'wi{hout the express permission from the Slat-Ion House Officer concerned. I vi. The Petitioner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.4, 6, and 7 shall I surrender their passports, if any, to the investigating officer. lf they claim that they do not have passports, they shall submit an 'affl'davit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. ,.`~ I lTR`tlE, COPY I I sD/- K.SRINIVASA RAJU .A.SSISTANT REGISTP`AP` sECTl6N OFFICER TJJI 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9038 of 2025 Dated 09.09.2025 executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; I ii. The F;etitioner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.4, 6, and 7 shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required; iii. The Petitioner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.4, 6, and 7 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution I witnesses; iv. The PetI'tiOner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos,4, 6, and 7 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. I v. The Petitioner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.4, 6, and 7 shall not leave the district ljmits'without th? express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. - vi. The Petitioner Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.4, 6, and 7 shall I 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. ,,,.r,~ 'sD/- `K.SRINIVASA RAJU I ITR`REE` a;OPY I I To, 1. The Station House Officer, Ajith Singh Nagar Police station, NTR Commissionerate District. 2. One CC to SRl. SUBRAHMANYAM KOTARI Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to Public Prosecutorf(AP) High Court ofA.P., Amaravati [OUT]. 4. One spare copy --.-3 -_I \ i.` =| i. ::f t3 -,1 : i..`.'j` I ,;i+ _ _ _ \ HIGH COURT DATED : 09/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.9038 of 2025 PARTLY ALLOWED