APHC010475772025 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: 9404 OF 2025 Between: 1. SHAIK MUNEER BASHA, S/O S. ISMAIL, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O 22-1-4, GOPAL NAGAR,1ST LINE. OLD MARKET CENTRE, DHANDUPALEM, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order: 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 Petitioner/Accused No.3 on bail in OR No.16/2025-26 of Forest Range Officer, Bakarapeta Range, Chittoor District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.3 herein for the offence punishable under Sections 20(1)(c) ii, iii, iv, vi, x, 29(2)(b), 29(4)(a)(i), 29(4)(b), 32A, 32B, 32C of A.P.Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016, Rule 3 of A.P.Sandal Wood and Red Sanders Wood Transit Rules, 1969 and Section 27 and 29 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. Material averments stemming from the prosecution are that on 28.07.2025 at about 9.00 p.m, the Forest Range Officials of Bakarapet Range had reached Siddulagandi Cheruvu location in Compartment No.28, Talakona Reserve Forest. While conducting combing in the surrounding areas, they noticed a vehicle stopped at some distance, where a few individuals were loading Red Sanders logs in the vehicle. The Forest staff surrounded and apprehended three individuals at the scene of offence and seized 8 red sander logs, weighing 156 Kgs and registered the above case. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri Sivaprasad Reddy Venati, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking him to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the Petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and his arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any condition that this Court may impose while granting bail to the Petitioner. 4. It is further submitted that the Petitioner has a permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of him absconding or evading the process of law. The Petitioner has cooperated with the investigation thus far and assures continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant further custodial detention, and if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, Petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the Petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms. P.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor strenuously opposed the grant of bail, contending that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses are to be examined. It is submitted that enlargement of the Petitioner on bail at this stage would seriously hamper the progress of the investigation and may result in non-cooperation from the Petitioner. The prosecution further apprehends that the Petitioner, if released, may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby obstructing the course of justice. It is also urged that there exists a real and imminent risk of the Petitioner absconding and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the progress of the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioner does not deserve the discretionary relief of bailand it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 7. 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 bail?” ANALYSIS: 8. The allegation against the Petitioner/ Accused No.3, as seen from the record, is that the Petitioner along with the assistance of other Accused acted as coolie for transportation of 8 logs, weighing 156 Kgs. The Petitioner was arrested on 29.07.2025. The Petitioner has been in judicial custody for the past 51 days. So far, 7 witnesses have been examined. All the witnesses are official witnesses. Major portion of investigation is completed. There are no adverse antecedents reported against the Petitioner. Chances of Petitioner threatening the witnesses or hampering the investigation or tampering the evidence would not arise. CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the Petitioner, his alleged role played in this case, and the period of detention undergone by the Petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate for Special Court of Trial Cases of Red Sanders Offences, Tirupati. ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned i.e Forest Range Officer, Bakarapeta Range, Chittoor District on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall not, directly or 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 Petitioner/Accused No.3 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claim that he do not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 17.09.2025 KK THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9404 OF 2025 17.09.2025 KK