IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE rPRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RA' CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9405 OF 2025 >o X' Between: 1. Ummanaboina Krishnaiah, (A3) S/o Narasimhulu, Aged about 53 years, R/o D.No.3/1176-3, Near Rama Muni Reddy Hospital, YMR Colony, Now at Near Olivia School, Pottipadu Road Proddatur Town Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 2. Kayali Srinivasulu, S/o Uthanna (A4) Aged about 45 D.N0.2/II-A, Chimalapenta Village, Pendlimarri Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. and years, R/o 3. Bandreddi Obula Reddy, S/o Subba Reddy, (A5) Aged about 54 years, R/o Kuppagattupalli Vilage, Chakrayapeta Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. 4. Shanivarapu Bala Gangi Reddy, S/o Nadipi Gangi Reddy, (A6) Aged about 44 years, R/o Chowtapalli Village, Pendlimarri Mandal Kadapa District. YSR ...Petitioners/Accused No.3 to 6 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh, at Amaravati. ....Respondent Petition under Sections 480 & 483 of BNSS praying that in the Circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the Petitioners who was arrayed as Accused No. 3 to 6 on bail in connection with Crime No 129 of 2025 on the file of Chapadu Police station Kadapa District. The Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Advocate for the Petitioners, and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, for the Respondent, the Court made the following APHC010475952025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9405/2025 Between: 1.UMMANABOINA KRISHNAIAH, S/0 NARASIMHULU, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/0 D.NO.3/1176-3, NEAR RAMA MUNI REDDY HOSPITAL, YMR COLONY, NOW AT NEAR OLIVIA SCHOOL, POTTIPADU ROAD PRODDATUR TOWN AND MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2.KAYALI SRINIVASULU, S/0 UTHANNAAGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/0 D.N0.2/11-A, CHIMALAPENTA VILLAGE, PENDLIMARRI MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 3.BANDREDDI OBULA REDDY, S/0 SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/0 KUPPAGATTUPALLI VILAGE, CHAKRAYAPETA MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 4.SHANIVARAPU BALA GANGI REDDY, S/0 NADIPI GANGI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, PENDLIMARRI MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. R/0 CHOWTAPALLI VILLAGE, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh, at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 2 Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER: This criminal petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the petitioners- accused Nos. 3 to 6 on bail in crime No. 129 of 2025 of Chapadu Police Station, YSR Kadapa District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191 (2), 191 (3), 303 (2), 109, 132 and 49 read with Section the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 20 (1) (C) (ii) (iii) (iv) (vi) (x) 20 (d) (i) (a) (b) (ii) (a) (b) of A.P. Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016, Rule 3 of A.P. Sandal Wood & Red Sanders Wood Transit Rules, 1969, Section 3 of P.D.P.P. Act, 1994, and Section 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972. 190 of and CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. On 09-08-2025 at about 6 p.m. at Chinnavaradayapalle Cross Proddatur-Annavaram Road, Chapadu Mandal, accused Nos. 1 to 6 were found and arrested while they weighing 1087.90 K.Gs. , on possession of 52 red sender logs were in CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: Sri Sivaprasad Reddy Venati, learned counsel for the 3. petitioners, submits that the petitioners are innocents and have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking to the commission of 3 the crime. It is contended that the petitioners are the sole breadwinners of their families and their arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to the dependents of the petitioners. The petitioners undertake to abide by condition that this Court may impose while granting bail to the petitioners. any 4. It is further submitted that the petitioners have permanent place residence and there is of likelihood of them absconding or evading the process of law. The petitioners have cooperated with the investigation so far and assure continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant custodial interrogation, if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, the petitioners would no and not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATFr Per contra, Ms. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, strenuously opposed the grant of bail, contending that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses yet to be examined. It is submitted that enlargement of the petitioners on bail at this stage would seriously 5. hamper the progress of the investigation and may result in non-cooperation from the petitioners. The prosecution further apprehends that the petitioners, 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 petitioners absconding and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the integrity of the 4 investigation, it is submitted that the discretionary relief of bail and i petitioners do not deserve It IS urged to dismiss the bail petition. the 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed learned counsel for both sides. on the arguments advanced by record. I have perused the entire POINT FOR CQNSIDFRATinM. In the light of the 7. case of the prosecution and the now the point for consideration is: contentions of learned counsel for both sides Whether the petitioners are entitled for grant of bail? ANALYSIS- 8. The allegations against the from the record petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 6, as seen are that they had indulged in dealing with 52 logs of Sander wood, weighing about 1087.90 red K.Gs. They are all coolies. They have by cutting red sander assisted the kingpin of the offence Assistant Public Prosecutor antecedents reported on 09-08-2025. They have been i the petitioners woods. Learned are no similar adverse submits that there against the petitioners. The petitioners were in judicial custody for the past 42 arrested days. All ■ They have of justice as the role of the of. the petitioners hampering the are permanent residents of YSR Kadapa District fixed abode. Chances of the petitioners absconding the clutches investigation, insofar IS completed. Hence, the chances tampering the evidence may not arise. Material portion of the i petitioners is concerned, i threatening the witnesses or or investigation would not arise. > 5 CONCLUSION- 9- Considering the facts and circumstances of the gravity of allegations levelled against the petitioners-accused case and the nature and Nos. 3 to 6, this Court is inclined to enlarge them on bail with the following stringent conditions: (i) The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 6 shall be enlarged on bail subject to their executing each a bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judicial Magistrate Class for trial of Tirupati; of I cases relating to Red Sanders Smuggling (ii) The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 6 shall Station House Officer concerned appear before the on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm till cognizance is taken by learned trial Court; (iii) The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 6 shall not indulge in commission of any offence in future; The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 6 shall commit or (iv) cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required; The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 6 shall not (V) directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to 6 dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court to any police officer; and (vi) The petitioners-accused Nos. 3 to 6 shall surrender their passports, if any, to the investigating officer. If they claim that they do not have passport, they shall submit affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. The criminal petition is accordingly allowed. or an 10. SDI- B.PRASAD RAO ASSISTANTaREGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SEenON OFFICER F To, 1. The Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class for trial of Red Sanders Smuggling, Tirupati 2. The Superintendent, District Jail, Chittoor, Chittoor District 3. The Station House Officer, Chapadu Police Station, District 4. One CC to SRI. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Advocate [OPUC] 5^ Two CCS to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra [OUT) 6. One spare copy cases relating to YSR Kadapa Pradesh PSR HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED: 19/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.9405 of 2025 ALLOWED