APHC010491982025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9699 OF 2025 Between: 1. JANGA PRAKASH RAO ALIAS PRAKASH ALIAS GOPI, S/O MARIYADASU, AGED 28 YEARS R/O SANJEEVANAGAR COLONY, KANCHIKAHERLA VILLAGE AND MANDAL ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its public prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. VALLEPU MOUNICA 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 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.171 of 2025 of Kanchikacherla Police Station, NTR Commissionerate, registered against the petitioner/Accused herein for the offence punishable under Section 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘BNS’). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. Material averments stemming from the prosecution are that on 17.08.2025 at 17.00 hrs at Perakalapadu Village, Kanchikacherla Mandal, wherein Accused is the resident of Sanjeevanagar Colony, Kanchiakacherla Village and Mandal and lives as mason worker. About 7 years ago, the Accused fell in love with Natgamani of nadigadda Village and marked her. They are not blessed with children. Around nine months ago, due to differences between the Accused and his wife, she left him and has been living in her parental home. At about six months ago, while going on road, the Accused came into contact with the deceased Bhavani @ Rajini. The deceased was already married with LW-3 and had three sons. Even then the Accused and deceased had developed illegal relationship and frequently used to meet outside and often talking over WhatsApp video calls. LW-3 came to know about the same, scolded the deceased to change her attitude. On 16.08.2025 at about 9.00 p.m, while the Accused was with his friends erecting a marriage pendal for friend’s marriage, the deceased phoned the Accused asking to meet her, the Accused told her it was not possible and that they should stay away for some time. Then the Accused along with his friend Gopalakrishna went on a bike driven by the deceased to Perakalapadu, left his friend at the cross road and went into the house of the deceased and the Accused took the deceased once again that they should stay apart for some days. On 17.08.2025 at around 17.00 hrs the defacto complainant observed as the deceased not come out from her house, then she went to the deceased house and found the deceased committed suicide by hanging to ceiling fan. Hence the above case. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Ms. Vellepu Mounica ,learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, and that there is no prima facie material or cogent evidence connecting the Petitioner to the commission of the crime. It is further contended that the Petitioner is the sole earning member of his family and that his incarceration would result in grave hardship and irreparable prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to comply with any condition that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper to impose while considering the prayer for grant of bail. 4. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is a permanent resident of Kanchikacherla Village and Mandal and there exists no apprehension of his absconding or evading the due process of law. The Petitioner has extended full cooperation in the course of investigation and undertakes to continue such cooperation in all future proceedings. It is also urged that the nature of the allegations does not necessitate custodial interrogation, and that the imposition of appropriate conditions would suffice to secure the ends of justice. In view of the foregoing, it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, asserting that the investigation is at a nascent and critical stage, with several material witnesses yet to be examined. It is submitted that the premature enlargement of the Petitioner on bail would be inimical to the sanctity and efficacy of the ongoing investigative process and may engender deliberate non-cooperation on the part of the Petitioner.The prosecution further raises an apprehension that, if released, the Petitioner may exert undue influence upon, or intimidate, prosecution witnesses, thereby impeding the administration of justice and vitiating the evidentiary foundation of the case. It is also contended that there exists a palpable and imminent risk of the Petitioner absconding, thereby frustrating the due process of law. 6. In view of the gravity and allegations, coupled with the potential threat posed to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioner is not entitled to the indulgence of discretionary relief and it is urged to dismiss the present Criminal Petition. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 7. In view of the rival submissions advanced by both the learned Counsel and upon a perusal of the prosecutorial narrative, the pivotal issue now meriting for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioner is entitled for grant of bail?” ANALYSIS: 8. The defacto complainant in her report and Section 161 of the Cr.P.C Statement stated that the deceased by name Bhavani had maintained extra marital life with the Petitioner/ Accused. The deceased was blessed with three children. The husband of the deceased having come to know about the extra marital relationship between the deceased and the Petitioner questioned her behaviour and in that regard certain disputes arose in between them. On 17.08.2025, the Petitioner went to the house of the deceased, later deceased committed suicide. It is nobody’s case that the deceased was otherwise killed. It is an admitted fact that the deceased committed suicide. So far 8 witnesses have been examined. The Petitioner was arrested on 17.08.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 32 days. The period for custodial interrogation is also expired. The Petitioner is permanent resident of Kanchikacherla Village and Mandal. The petitioner has got fixed abode. CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioner, his alleged role played in this case, and the period of detention undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner/Accused shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nandigama. ii. The petitioner/Accused shall appear before the Station House Officer, Kanchikacherla Police Station, NTR Commissionerate, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner/Accused shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The petitioner/Accused shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The petitioner/Accused 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. vi. The petitioner/Accused 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. vii. The petitioner/Accused shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claim that he do not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 24.09.2025 KK THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9699 OF 2025 24.09.2025 KK