IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAR FRIDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER i-I?'<f;`: TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: '.i;=) THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO r' ^' CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9402 OF 2025 Betwee n : N. Narasl'mhappa @ Narasimhulu, S/o Narayanappa, aged 50 years, R/o Kammanapalli Village, Gudipalli Post and Panchayath, Bhairakuru MandaI, Mulabagal Taluka, Kolar Dl-strict, Karnataka State. Petitioner/Accused No.1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Station House Officer RSASTF Police Station, Tirupati,Tirupati District. AND Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS is filed praying that in the circumstances stated I-n the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail in Cr.No. 39/2025 of RSASTF P.S., Tirupati, Tirupati District, on such term; and conditions. The petition/Appeal comI'ng On for hearing, upon Perusing the Petitionf and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri SRINIVASU L Advocate for the petitioner, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) for the Respondent and the court made the following. APHCO10476652025 lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER T`WO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO . CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9402 OF 2025 Between : 1.N. NARASIMHAPPA ALIAS NARASIMHULU, S/O NARAYANAPPA, ; AGED 50 YEARS,R/O KAMMANAPALLI VILLAGE, GUDIPALLI POST AND PANCHAYATH, BHAIRAKURU MANDAL, MULABAGAL TALUKA,KOLAR DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE. .HPETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by Station House Officer RSASTF Police Station, Tirupati, Tirupati District. H.RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT counsel for the petitioner/accused: 1. SRINIVASU L Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order : I. `The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity fthe BNSSJ), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail in Crime No.39 of 2025 of RSASTF Police Station, Tirupati registered against the Petit'IOner/Accused € = - `. _ No.1 for the offence punishable under sections 303(2) read with 3(5), 49, 61(2) of BharatI-ya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 20(1)(c) ii, iii, iv, x, 36(a) read with 32-A, 29(4)(a)(i) ofA.P.Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION 2. Material averments sfemmI'ng from the prosecution are that on 19.08.2025 at 7.00 a.m on Renigunta - Railway Kodu Road, near Anjaneyapuram Forest Check Post, Karakambadi Forest Beat, I.N.Palyam Forest Section, Tirupati Range, wherein the police, conducted vehicle checking at the scene of offence. During vehicle checking the police ho{iced two vehicles coming from Railway Kodur side towards Renigunta side in high speed, On Seeing the Police, they stopped both vehI'CIes at some distance and try to escape. The Police apprehended one person and seized 20 Red Sander Logs along with car. Remaining persons were escaped. Hence the above Case was registered. OF THE COUNSEL FORTHE P ETITIONER 3. Sri L. SrI|niVaSu, learned counsel for the petI'tiOner Submits that the petitl-oner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evI'denCe linking him to the commission of the crime. It is E± a contended that the PetI-tiOner iS the sole breadwinner of hI-S 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. ..I-I-`y ~+ .._-_+- ,I__`_-` 4. ]t is further submI't{ed that the Petitioner hast a permanent place of residence and there is no likelI-hood Of him absconding Or eVadl-ng the process of law. The Petitioner has cooperated wI'th the investigation thus far and assures continued cooperatI'On 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 grantl-ng the bail, Petitioner would not violate it; and it js urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. .Per confra, Ms. P.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor strenuously opposed the grant of bail, contendI|ng that the investigation is still underway and several material wI-tneSSeS are tO be eXamI'ned. 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 obstructI-ng the COurSe Of justice. It is also urged that there exists a real and imminent rI'Sk Of the petitioner absconding and evadllng the due process of law, Given the gravity of the .allegations and the potential threat to the progress of the investl'gation, it I is submitted that the -petI-tiOner 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 entl're recorda _ i POINT FOR C NSIDERATION 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.1, as seen from the record is that he had acted as pilot in transportation of 20 Red Sander Logs, weighing about 602 Kgs. The Petitioner was,arrested on 19.08.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 30 days. There are no similar adverse antecedents reported against the petitioner. so far, six witnesses have been examined. They are a" material wI-tneSSeS. Prime portI'On Of the investigation is completed. The prohibited Red Sander`Logs were traced and seized,-of course arrest of Accused Nos. 2 and 3 is pendI-ng. CONCLUSION: 9| ConsI-dering the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the Petitl'oner, his alleged role played in this case, and the period of detention undergone by the Petitioner, {hl-s court is inclI-ned tO enlarge the Petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs,50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each •\ /\\ -* I to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magl-strafe of First class-Gum- Special Court for Trial of Cases relating to Red Sanders Smuggling, TirupatI'. ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the Station House OffI-Cer concerned, On every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. d'ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not leave the liml-ts of the District without prior permission from the station House Officer concerned. iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not commit or indulge in I commission of any offence in future. v. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further I|nVeStigatiOn Of the Case and Shall make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 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 hI'm/her from disclosing such facts to th.e court or to any police officer. vii. The Petitioner/Accused No,1 shall surrender his passport, if any, {o the investI'gating OffI'Cer. If he claim that he do not have J- =_J:=E- I- 10. To, a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating officer. AccordI'ngly, the cr['mjnal petition is allowed. . SD/-B.PRASAD RAO OFFICER F SECTION //TRUE COPY// lSTANl]''-REG.[§TRAR L LF2irL 1. The Judicial Magistrate of First class-Gum-SpI. Court for Trial of Cases relating to Red Sanders Smuggling, Tirupati. 2. The Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Tirupati. 3. The Station House Officer, RSASTF Police Station, TirupatI', Tirupati District. 4. One CC to SRI. SRINIVASU L Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor (AP) High Court ofA.P., Amaravati [OUT]- 6. One spare copy \. HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED: 19/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.9402 of 2025 ALLOWED