APHC010465782025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9332/2025 Between: 1. CHATLA NAGABHUSHANAM, S/O.GNANESHWAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC PROOPRIETOR OF SWAROOPA RANI TRADERS R/O.H.NO.6-5A003, PLOT NO.14WP, MARUTHI NAGAR COLONY, BADANGPET, SAROOR NAGAR MANDAL, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA-500058. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Through the Station House Officer, Parchur Police Station, Bapatia District, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. V.N.V.SURYA DATTU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This criminal petition has been filed under Section 482 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the petitioner-accused No. 1for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.150 of 2023 of Parchur Police Station, Bapatla District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections420, 406, 409 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution is thatin the month of April, 2023, at Cherkuru Village, Parchur Mandal, accused No. 1 and two others came to de facto complainant and made him and some other farmers of surrounding villages to believe that they were doing business under the name and style of Swaruparani Traders and Sivabalaji Traders and they would purchase Maize crop and asked to supply Maize crop to their traders and they would deposit amount in the bank accountof one Dasari Ramakrishna who is mediator. De facto complainant and others believed the deceitful words of the accused and supplied Maize crop worth of Rs.1,50,00,000/- to their traders from 12-04-2023 to 15-04- 2023. Later, the accused paid Rs.66,96,924/- to de facto complainant and other farmers. An amount of Rs.83,00,000/- was due from the accused. When de facto complainant and other farmers asked the accused for the remaining amount through the mediator over phone, the accused did not give proper reply and threatened them to kill. 3 3. Sri V.N.V.Surya Dattu, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole earning memberof his family and he is ready to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. 4. Per contra, Ms. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioner is released on pre-arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.Perused the record. 6. This Court, by order dated 22-07-2025 in Criminal Petition No. 7340 of 2025, granted pre-arrest bail to the wife of the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is not on the similar footing of his wife. It is reported that there are 11 similar adverse antecedents against the petitioner, they are (1) crime No. 195 of 2023 of C.C.S., Hyderabad; (2) crime No. 322 of 2010 of Jubilee Hills Police Station, Hyderabad; (3) crime No. 324 of 2010 of Jubilee Hills Police Station, Hyderabad; (4) crime No. 6 of 2016 of Mulkanur Police Station, 4 Warangal; (5) crime No. 175 of 2017 of Mudigonda Police Station, Khammam District; (6) crime No. 70 of 2018 of Narasampet Town Police Station, Warangal District; (7) crime No. 26 of 2020 of Saroornagar Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Hyderabad; (8) crime No. 1151 of 2021 of Mailardevpalli Police Station, Cyberabad, Hyderabad; (9) crime No. 23 of 2023 of Sattupally Police Station, Khammam District; (10) crime No. 221 of 2023 of Meerpet Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Hyderabad; and (11) crime No. 252 of 2023 of Meerpet Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Hyderabad. Further, the petitioner has not approached learned Sessions Judge at the first instance for granting of pre-arrest bail. He has directly approached this Court. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner inasmuch as it would amount to giving a license for the person against whom serious allegations are levelled and it would also amount to giving a shield or protection to the person against whom accusation is well established as per the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab1 and Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State of Delhi2. There are no merits in the criminal petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 8. In the result, the criminal petition is dismissed. However, as per the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, liberty is granted to the petitioner- 1 (1980) 2 SCC 565 2 (2020) 5 SCC 1 5 accused No. 1to surrender before learned jurisdictional magistrate within a period of two weeks from this day and move an appropriate application before learned jurisdictional Court concerned. On such surrender and on moving of such application, learned jurisdictional Court concerned is directed to dispose of the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of three weeks by giving due opportunity to learned Public Prosecutor concerned for hearing. ________________________ Date: 16.09.2025, Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J. JSK THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO 6 CRIMINAL PETITION No.9332 OF 2025 Date:16.09.2025 JSK