f3?i? ~>r-j> o/ /? IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl MONDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JAN TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE .-PRESENT: `'`\` HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO.I 321 OF 2025 [3327] Between.I Kadirj Sreekanth Reddy, s/o Kadiri Raja Sekhar Reddy, R/o 1/8-1-10, East palem, Tadipatri, Ananthapur Dl-strict, Andhra Pradesh. AND Petitioner 1. The State OfAndhra pradesh, Rep.by its public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra pradesh, velagapudi, AmaravatI', Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The StatI'On House Officer, Tad[|patrj Town police Station, Ananthapur District, Andhra pradesh. Respondent/complainant petl-tI-On under Section 482 of BNSS (438 of Cr.P.C.,) is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affldavI't filed jn support of the criminal petI'tiOn, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petI-tiOner on ba" in the event of his arrest by the s.H.O./I.O. of Tadipatri Town RS, Ananthapuram District in crime No.94 of 2024 dated 14.05.2024 u/s 147,148,188, 332, 427, 307, 332, 353 lRC, 3,4, RDRRA R/w 149 lPC on such terms and condI-lions aS thI-S Hon'ble court deem fit and proper in the cl'rcumstances of the case couNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER : SRI. M SHANIVIUKHA TEJA couNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER ORDER: This Criminal Pet'ltion, under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. is filed seeking to enlarge the petitioner/accused on anticipatory bail in Crime No.94/2024 of Tadipatri Town Police Station, Anantapuram D'lstrict. Date and Time of Crime incident At about 03:30 PM on 14.05.2024 Place of Crime 'lncident Ragithotapalem, lnfrOnt OfsuryamuniHouse,Tadipatriown,Ananthapuramu. Date and Time of registration of FIR.No.94/2024 at O4:30 PM on Crime 14.05.2024 Offences alleged sections 147,148,188, 427, 307,353,332readwith149lPCandsection3and4ofP.D.P.P.Act. 2. Heard arguments of learned counsel on both sides. 3. Perused the record. 4. Petitioner contends that he is innocent and unreasonably he Was accused of these offences and has reason to believe that he may be arrested. 5. Respondent contends that the peace in the SOCiety Was disturbed, property was damaged and people and public servants were hurt. The presence of the petitioner in Tadipatri is likely to create further unrest. 6. The material on record disclosed the names Of big and not SO big persons belonging to two leading pol'ltical parties - one, the then ruling party, the other, the then opposition party. The incident occurred One day after this democracy went for elections to the Parliament and the =EEri _5? - I •ae I, Assembly. The allegations are that the rival groups of persons of ruling and opposition party, large in number, holdl'ng weapons, being led by their leaders, had been indulging in riotous acts and despite firing by police they did not relent and caused damage to police vehicles. 7. Record further shows that the investigation commenced and Progressed and Certain Witnesses Were examined and their statements were recorded, material objects were seized and mahazars were Prepared and some Of the accused Were arrested. The incident, though created panic, is one that does not seem to requl're any custodial interrogation. Given the fact that thl's petitioner is ordl'nary resident of the area, minding his own avocation; granting the prayer does not dent the smooth investigation. However, there is need to hedge the emotions of rival groups so as to allow the peace to thrive and perpetuate. Therefore, conditioning him by certain terms would serve the process of justice well. 8. Observations made here are limited to the present proceedings. 9. ln the result, thI'S Petition iSallOWed in the following terms: - In the event of arrest of the petitioner herein/accused, he shall be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties of the like sum each to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting/Investigating officer. The Petitioner/accused Shall mark his attendance before the Investigating Officer on 5thand 19th of every month between 10.00 AM and 1.00 PM for a period of three months or till filing of the charge sheet whichever is earlier. The petitioner/accused shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required, and he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any Persons acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. He shall +`- I -J + not I'ndulge in slmjlar acts of crI'me. From the tI'me he avails the ba" he shall stay away from Tadipatrj town for a fortnight. Miscellaneous applications, pending jf any, sha" stand closed. SD/-B.cH'TTI ASSISTAN JOSEPH _BEeIS TEAR //TRUE COPY// OFFICER Fol ` To,, 1. The Station House Officer, Tadipatri Town Police Station, Ananthapur District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. One CC to SRl. M SHANMUKHA TEJA Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court ofA.P[OUT] 4. One spare copy T/ HIGH COURT SRK,J DATED :27/01 /2025 BAIL ORDER 3.1) CRLP.No|3se of 2025 ALLOWED \ \ •f< 1 2 FEE '!l)'!5