_--=====+_. lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO `l\.` CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9573 OF 2025 [3521 I Between : 1. Pathan Arafath, S/o. Masudulla, Aged about 34 Years, R/o. D.No.5-466, Aayappa Swamy Temple, Baek side, Katevaram, Guntur Distriet, Andhra pradesh 522-202. 2. Pathan lmran Khan, S/o. Asudulla, Aged about 39 Years, R/o. D.No.8- 28-5/A, Katevaram Road, Balajirao Peta, Tenali, Guntur District, Andhra pradesh 522-202 Petitioner/Accused No.1&2 AND The State ofAndhra Pradesh, Represented by I-ts public Prosecutor, Through ongole II Town Police Station, Prakasham District A.P. High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Respondent PetitI'On under Sections 480 I/w & 483 of BNSS (Old Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C), is fI-led prayI-ng that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased tot enlarge the petitioners/ Accused No.1 & 2 on baI-I in connection With the F.I.R. No. 100 of 2025, dated 17.07.2025 on the file of Ongole ll Town Police4 Station, Prakasham District. `< The petitI-On coming on for hearing, upon perusl-ng the petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri soM!SETTY GANESH BABU, Advocate for the petitioners and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent and the court made the following; \\ ly Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.9573 of'2025 Dated 19.Og-i.2025 The -Court made 1:he fo[[owing: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (for brevity [the Cr.P.C.I)/ Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity [the BNSS'), seeking to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail in Cr.No.100 of 2025 of Ongole lI Town Police Station, Prakasam District, registered against the petitioners/Accused Nos,1 and 2 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 82(2), 316 (2),119(1), 351 (2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity [the BNS]). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The incident occurred prior to 20.06.2025 at lslampet, 5th Lane, ongole, and was reported on 17.07.2025 at 15.00 hrs by the complainant. She stated that after her first marriage in 2006 with Shaik AbduI AIam ended -ln divorce in 2017, she met the accused A1, Patan Arafat Khara, in 2018 and subsequently married him on 26.03.2023 as per Muslim rites. Later, A1, along with his family members A2-Imran Khan, A3-Riyasat Khan, A4-Maimun, and relatives A5-ShaikAshik All and A6- Patan _, Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.9573 of 2025 Dated 19.09.2025 'Shahasta, with a common intention to cheat her, misappropriated cash of Rs.85.63 Iakhs and 220 grams of g.old under the guise of marriage. When questioned, the accused threatened fo kill her and her family, and Al further threatened tot upload her nude photos on social media. Hence, the present report. CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri Somisetty Ganesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioners, submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking to the commission of the crime. lt is contended that the petitioners are the s,ole breadwinner of their family and their arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to the dependents of the petitioners. The petitioners undertake to abide by any condition that this Court may -Impose while grant'lng bail to the pet'ltioners. 4. lt is further submitted that the petitioners have permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of their absconding or evading the \1 process of law. The petitioners have cooperated with the investigation thus far and assure continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant custodial P -,i= iE= Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No_9573 of 2025 Dated 19.09.2025 interrogation, and if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, the petitioners would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per confra, Ms.Akh'lla Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, strenuously opposed to grant of bail, contending that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses are yet to be examined. [t is submitted that enlargement of the petitioners on bail at this stage would seriously 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. lt is also urged that there exists a real and imminent r'lsk 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 investigation, it is submitted that the petitioners donot deserve the.discretionary relief of bai[and it is urged to dismiss the bail petit'lon. ¢ 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: ` -` ~+ .I. ®. ri±p:rsaese^±esgr£`:£F*-± `-I I Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.9573 of 2025 Dated 19.O9.2025 7. ln the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of learned counsel for both sides, now the point for consl-deration is: '{Whetlher the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 areentitled for grant of bail?,, ANALYSIS : 8. As seen from the record, when the petitioner/Accused No.1 approached this Court in W.P.No.18345 of 2025, on 17.07.2025 a learned Single Judge of this Court disposed of the Writ Petition, directing the police not to interfere with the personal life and liberty`of the petitioner without following due process of law. The petitioners were arrested on 30.08.2025 and they have been in J'udiCI-al Custody for the Past 36 days. So far, six witnesses have been examined. As per the report lodged with the poll'ce by the de-facto complainant, the petitioner/Accused No.1 married her, though `. :i;ird, .r she had earlier b€_eh married and blessed with children. The grievance of the de-facto complainant is that the petitioner/Accused No.1, with an intention to take away her property, married her and later deceived her by I, taking away her gold ornaments and properties, and thereafter contracted a third marriage with one Gulshan, thereby ruI|ning the life Of the de-faCtO complainant. She accordingly lodged a complaint against her husband anci his relatives. Ji I_~ ~ _ .I.-- --. Dr_ YLR, J CrI.P.No.9573 of 2025 Dated 19_09.2025 CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the facts and circum.stances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations [eve[led against the petitioners, the relationship between the petitioner/Accused No.1 and the de-facto comp'ainant, and the alleged role played by the petitioners in this case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail, subject to the fo[]owing stringent condlltions: (i) The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees FiftyThousand only) each with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned ll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole. ii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till filing of the charge sheet. iii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not leave the limits 'of the District withcut prior permission from the Station House Officer concemed. -.a- ``. .I `--_3 IV. V. VI. Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.9573 of 2025 Dated 19.09_2025 The petI-tiOnerS/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall 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.1 and 2 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. 10. The Criminal Petition is accordingly allowed. SD,-B.CHJm JOSEPH ASSISTANT //TRUE COPY// ON OFFICER -i EL````To , 1. The lI Additional Judicial Magistrate of First class, Ongole 2. The Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Ongole District 3. The Station House Officer, Ongole lI Town Police Station, Prakasham District 4. One CC to SRI. SOMISETTY GANESH BABU Acivocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court ofAP [OUT] 6. One spare Copy KJ /:i HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED:19/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.9573 of 2025 ALLOWED