APHC010475852025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9403 Between: 1. KARRI MAHESH BABU ALIAS MAHESH, S/O LATE RAMABRAHMAM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O D. NO. 20/7 COLONY, MACHILIPATNAM. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by SHO, Machilipatnam P.S., Krishna District Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. K V ADITYA CHOWDARY 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 enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.80 of 202 Machilipatnam Town Police Station, IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9403 OF 2025 KARRI MAHESH BABU ALIAS MAHESH, S/O LATE RAMABRAHMAM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O D. NO. 20/7-103, VISWABRAHMIN COLONY, MACHILIPATNAM. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by SHO, Machilipatnam P.S., Krishna District Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: K V ADITYA CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 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’ enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.80 of 202 Police Station, Krishna District registered IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3521] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO KARRI MAHESH BABU ALIAS MAHESH, S/O LATE RAMABRAHMAM, 103, VISWABRAHMIN ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by SHO, Machilipatnam P.S., Krishna District Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.80 of 2025 of registered against the Petitioner/Accused herein for the offence punishable under Sections 121(2) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. Material averments stemming from the prosecution are that 24/ 25.08.2025 at 0.30 hrs the defacto complainant reported that he was working as a home guard in Machilipatnam Police Station. On 24.08.2025 he and PC 1826 of Machilipatnam P.S deployed duty in Night beat-1 from 21.00 hrs to 5.00 hrs, they both are moving their beat points at about 00.30 hrs, they reached Viswabramhin Colony, Machilipatnam Town, at that time the Accused Karri Mahesh came there and abused him with filthy language and punch with hand on his mouth, threatened to kill him while discharging his official duties. Hence the above case was registered. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri K.V.Aditya Chowdary, 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 Petitioner/ Accused, as seen from the record, is that he fisted on the face of Home Guard of Police Department on several times and abused him in filthy language and also abused the Police Constable. The Petitioner was arrested on 25.08.2025. He has been in the judicial custody for the past 24 days. Four witnesses have been examined. LW-2 is the eye-witness. The Petitioner was involved in the following offences viz., 1) Crime No.80 of 2008, under Section 324 read with 34 of the IPC of Chilakalapudi Police Station 2) Crime No.104 of 2021, under Section 447, 431 of the IPC of Machilipatnam Police Station and 3) Crime No.87 of 2024 under Section 509, 324, 354-B read with 34 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3 (2) of SC/ ST (POA) Act, 2015 of Machilipatnam Police Station. Investigation is pending. Receipt of Wound Certificate and C.C.T.V footage are also awaited. Some more witnesses have to be examined. CONCLUSION: 9. This Court does not find any merit to consider the request of the Petitioner at this juncture, inasmuch as there are reasonable grounds to believe that the Petitioner has not indulged in the commission of the alleged offence. There are no merits in the above Criminal Petition. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. ________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 19.09.2025 KK