lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE YI LAKSHMANA RAO gr-- CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9401 OF 2025 ~p-~ Betwee n : 1. Desannagari Narasimhulu, S/o. D.Anjaneyulu, Aged 37 years, R/o. D.No. 4-4-1073, Bommagunta, Tirupati. 2. Pakala Pavan Kalyan, S/o. Gurunatha, aged 28 years, R/o. D.No. 4-8-75, Bommagunta, Tirupati. ...Petitioners/Accused No.2 & 3 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh,r'rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, At Amaravati. ...Respondent ~ Petition under Section 480 and 483 of BNSS, is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioners/accused no.2 & 3 on bail, pending investigation, inqui-ry and trial in POR.No'.34/2025-26 of Flying Squad Party, Piler. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Peti.lion and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri D.Purna Chandra Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Public Prosecutor for Respondent, the CQIJrt made the following --._ I APHCO10475872025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special OrigI-hal Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9401 OF 2025 [3521] Between : 1,DESANNAGARI NARASIMHULUu S/O. D. ANJANEYULU, AGED 37 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 4-4-1073, BOMMAGUNTA, TIRUPATI. 2.PAKALA PAVAN KALYANH S/O. GURUNATHA, AGED 28 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 4-8-75, BOMMAGUNTA, TIRUPATI. H.PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep by its public prosecutor, High Court ofAndhra Pradesh,I At Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(s): 1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: The Criminal Petition has been filed under sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity {the BNSS!), seeking to enlarge the Petitioners/Ac`L`uS~ed Nos. 2 and 3 on bail in p.o.R.No.34/2025-26 ¢} A of Flying Squad Party, Pileru, registered against the Petitioners/ Accused Nos. 2 and 3 herein for the offence Punishable under Sections 303(2) read w-lth 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brev-lty 'lthe BNS") 49, 61(2) of [the BNSJ; under Sections 20(1)(c)(ii)(it'l)(iv)&(x) read W'lth 20(1)(d)(i)(a) and (b), sect-Ion 32-A, 32-B, 32-C of A.P.Forest Amendment Act, 1967 and contravention of the Rule 3 of Andhra Pradesh Sandal Wood and Red sanders wood Transit Rules, 1969, Section 29 (4)(a)(i)(a) & (b) and 32-A read with 36(a) and (b) of A.P.Forest Act,1967 (as amended by A.P.Forest Act 15 of2016). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. Material averments stemming from the Prosecution are that On o9.07.2025 at about ll.00 p.m on rece-lpt of credible information the FIying squad Division, Piler div'lded into two teams and Proceeded tO the scene Of offence at pulicherla - Kalluru road on the way to Railway bridge and that on 10.07.2025 at about 4.00 a.m, they saw one Tata lntra Luggage auto coming towards them with Registration No. AP TJ 2573 on that the forest officer with the help of torch lights and Laatis tr-led to stop the said vehicle at some distance, on seeing the police on person jumped from the said vehicle and escaped from the said place. But the pol'lce apprehended them and Checked the said vehicles, where it was found 8 red sander logs, the Same Was Seized along with said two cars and registered the above Case. PETITIONER.- CONTENTIONS OFTHE COUNSEL FOR THE 3. Sri D. Purna Chandra Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners are innocents and have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, and that there I-S nO PnJ-ma faC,'e material or cogent evidence connecting the PetI'tiOnerS tO the commission Of the Crime. It I'S further contended that the Petitioners are the sole earning member of their respective family and that their incarceration would result in grave hardship and irreparable prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioners undertake to comply with any condition that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to impose while considering the prayer for grant of bail. 4. lt is further submitted that the petitioners are permanent residents of Bommagunta, Tirupati and there exists no apprehension of their absconding or evading the due process of law. The PetI-tiOnerS have extended full cooperation in the course of investigation and undertakes to continue such cooperation in all future proceedings. lt is also urged that the nature of the allegations does not necessitate custodial interrogation, and that the imposition of appropriate conditions would suffice to secure the ends of justice. [n view of the foregoing, it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per cot,fro, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, asserting that the investigation is at a nascent and Critical stage, with several material witnesses yet to be \ ~ /-.., examined. lt is submitted that the premature enlargement of the Petitioners on bail would be inimical to the sanctity and efficacy of the ongoing investigatI'Ve process and may engender deliberate non-cooperation on the part of the Petitioner. The prosecution further raises an apprehension that, if released; the Petitioners may exert undue influence upon, or I'ntimidate, Prosecution witnesses, thereby impeding the administration of justice and vitiatihg the evidentiary foundation of the case. lt is also contended that there exists a palpable and imminent risk of the petitioners absconding, thereby frustrating the due process of law. 6. ln view of the gravity and allega{jons, coupled with the potential threat posed to the integrity of the investigation, jt is submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to the indulgence of discretionary relief and it is urged to dismiss the present Criminal Petition. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 7. ln view of the rival submissions advanced by both the learned Counsel and upon a perusal of the prosecutorial narrative, the pivotal issue now meriting for consideration is: [[Whether the Petitioners are entitled for grant Of bail?" ANALYSIS: 8. This is the second bail application. Earlier bail application was dismissecl on the ground that investigation is met comp!etedD Leamec! counsel or the Petitioners submits that the p,etitioners were not on earlier occasion arraigned as Accused in any case relating to the red sandal logs. The Petitioners were arrested on 10.07.2025. +hey have been in judicial custody for the past 77 days. The Petitioners are permanent resl-dents of Bommagunta, Tirupati. They have got fixed abode. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that charge sheet has been filed, after thorough investI'gatiOn and it iS under PRC stage. CONCLUSION: 9. In view of change of circumstance and also period of detention undergone by the Petitioners, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioners / ` Accused Nos. 2 and 3 on bail with the following stringent conditions.I i. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3shall be enlarged on bail subject to theI'r executing a bond for a Sum Of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of First class for trial of cases relating to Red Sanders Smuggling, Tirupati. ii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos. 2 and 3 shall appear before the (station House Officer concerned) Flying Squad Party, Pileru, on every Saturday I-n between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The Petitioners / Accused Nos., 2 and 3 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The Petitioners/ Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The Petitioners/ Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further l'nves{igation of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The Petitioners/Accused Nos. 2 and 3 shall not, directlyor 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. vii. The Petitioners/ Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall surrender their passports, if any, to the investigating officer. lf they claim that they do not have passports, they shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. . sD/-B.PRASAD RAO //TRUE COPY// ASSIST#GISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Judicial MagI-Strafe Of First Class for trial of cases relating to Red Sanders Smuggling, Tirupati.I 2. The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Tirupati. 3. The Forest Range Officer, FIying Sq.uad Party, Piler. 4. One CC to Sri D.Purnachandra Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs toPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P., Amaravati,[OUT] 6. One spare copy. PSD \ \ ,` HIGH COURT I DR.YLR,J DATE : 25/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.9401 of 2025 ALLOWED fat ` _\^ ;--,|f.--{t, .