APHC010465522025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9248/2025 Between: 1. RAVI SINGH ALIAS RAFI, S/O. AMBIKA SINGH, AGED 39 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. 2-121/1, PENDURTHI, SUJATHA NAGAR, VISAKAHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 2. SHAIK USMAN, S/O. SHAIK MAHAMAD MUSTHAFA, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. PERICHERLA VILLAGE, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhrapradesh at Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): BALAJI BOLLA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.9248 of 2025 Dated 17.09.2025 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 petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 5 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.359 of 2025 of Arundalpet Police Station, Guntur District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 318 (2), 316 (5) read with 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 16.06.2025, at about 21.00 hours, the complainant reported that the accused had developed acquaintance with him and made him to believe that they were engaged in the business of rice-pulling machines at Delhi through a company named AIR SPACE Metals. They allegedly convinced the complainant, with deceitful words, that if he invests Rs.15,00,00,000/- in their business, he would get a profit of Rs.2,000 crore, and further represented that the Prime Minister and Amit Shah were also partners in their business. They asked the complainant to invest Rs.7,00,00,000/- in the business, stating that Accused No.3 would invest the remaining amount. Believing their representations, the complainant paid 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.9248 of 2025 Dated 17.09.2025 Rs.7,40,00,000/- to the accused through several transactions. However, Accused No.3 did not invest the remaining amount. Later, the complainant came to know that the said company is a dubious and false company and that the accused had colluded together and cheated him intentionally for wrongful gain. Upon receipt of the report, a case was registered. 3. Mr.Balaji Bolla, the learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioners are the sole earning members of the family and, they are ready to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. 4. Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioners are released on pre-arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing submissions, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.9248 of 2025 Dated 17.09.2025 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. As seen from the record, this Court, in Crl.P.No.7555 of 2025 vide order dated 12.08.2025, was not inclined to grant any relief, but permitted the petitioners to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned within a period of one (01) week. However, the petitioners have not surrendered and instead filed a fresh application seeking the same relief. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and on the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, time is extended for the petitioners to surrender before the Jurisdictional Court concerned within a period of one (01) week from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Failing which, the Investigating Officer may proceed in accordance with law. The Investigating Officer is present before this Court today, and his further presence is hereby dispensed with. 8. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. On such surrender of the petitioners, the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned shall endeavor to dispose of the said application in accordance with law and on its own merits, by giving due opportunity of hearing to both 5 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.9248 of 2025 Dated 17.09.2025 parties including the Public Prosecutor concerned, and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time, preferably within two (02) days. ________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 17.09.2025 RSI 6 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.9248 of 2025 Dated 17.09.2025 78 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.9248 of 2025 Date:17.09.2025 RSI