APHC010464082025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9251/2025 Between: Erreboyani Madhan Mohan @ Madava ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SIVA NAGARJUNA SIDHADAPU 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 Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNSS‟) by the petitioner/Accused No.10 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.15 of 2025 of Panjani Police Station, Chittoor District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 318 (4), 316 (2), 351(2), 61(2) and 111(2)(b) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNS‟). 2 CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The case of the prosecution is that prior to 02.02.2025 at Rayalapeta Village, a report was lodged at the police station on 02.02.2025 at 5:00 p.m. by the complainant. He stated that in April 2023, while he visited Rayalapeta along with his relative, M. Suryaprakash Reddy, for some banking-related work, he came into contact with Accused No.1, who introduced himself as a Stock Exchange Broker. Accused No.1 induced the complainant to believe that he could earn substantial profits through the share market if he invested money through him. Further, Accused No.2 (wife of Accused No.1), Accused No.3, Accused No.4, Accused No.5, Accused No.6, and Accused No.7, also made the complainant believe that investing money with Accused No.1 in the share market would yield good profits. Believing their representations, the complainant paid a total amount of Rs.72,21,000/- to the accused in various installments through bank accounts and PhonePe numbers provided by them. The accused later returned an amount of Rs.27,51,000/- to the complainant, claiming it to be the profit earned from share market investments. Thereafter, the accused stopped responding to the complainant. Inspite of repeated requests for the return of his remaining money, the accused kept postponing repayment. Finally, on 09.08.2024 at Punganur, Accused No.1 and Accused No.8 informed the complainant that his money had been used in cricket betting and was lost. They also threatened him with dire consequences, 3 stating that they would kill him if he revealed the matter to anyone. Thus, the accused dishonestly cheated the complainant to the tune of Rs.44,77,000/-. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Mr.Siva Nagarjuna Sidhadapu, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. The Petitioner is the sole earning member of his family, and his arrest would cause irreparable hardship to his dependents. The Petitioner is willing to abide by any condition that this Court may deem fit and proper for the grant of anticipatory bail. The Petitioner has got fixed abode. 4. It is further submitted that there is no recovery attributable to the Petitioner and custodial interrogation period was over and such custody is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Petitioner has 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 grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.10 in the interest of justice. ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: 5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akila 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 4 Petitioner is imperative for eliciting material facts. It is submitted that if the Petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail, there is a grave apprehension that he may not cooperate with the investigation and may evade the process of law. 6. It is further urged that the prosecution also apprehends that the Petitioner 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 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 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 Petitioner is entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?” ANALYSIS: 9. As seen from the record, the nature of allegations leveled against the petitioner/Accused No.10, prima facie, will not fall under the category of organized crime, but fall under the category of the offence which is liable for punishment of less than seven (07) years. This Court on 31.07.2025in Crl.P.No.7601 of 2025 granted anticipatory bail to accused Nos.2, 4, 6 to 8 and 11. 5 10. Considering the facts and circumstances, the gravity and nature of the allegations levelled the Petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/ Accused No.10. CONCLUSION: 11. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner/Accused No.10 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a personal 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 petitioner/Accused No.10shall make himself available for investigation as and when required; iii. The petitioner/Accused No.10shall not cause any threat,inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; iv. The petitioner/Accused No.10 shall appear before theStation House Officer concerned once in a week i.e., onevery Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m.,till filingof the charge sheet. _______________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 15.09.2025 S D P 6 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.9251 of 2025 Date: 15.09.2025 S D P