I/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV MONDAY, THE TivENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUA TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA RED CRIMINAL PETITION NO.- 384 OF 2025 Between : yelisetti Karthik, S/o. Yellsettl Surya Chandra Rao, 33 years, R/o.102-24, yelisetti Vaibhavam, TPT Colony, Seetammadhara,visakhapatnam. Petitioner/Accused No.1 AND The State of Ar]dhra Pradesh, Rep., by the pubII-C Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra pradesh at AmaravatI-. Respondent petition under section 480 I/w 483 of BNSS, 2023 is filed 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 enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with the crime No. 169 of 2024 on the file of the Dwaraka police station, visakhapatnam, visakhapatnam Distrl'ct. 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 Ms. DIVYA.V Advocate for the petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent, the court made the following - r/ APHCO10O19842O25 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl (special original Jurisd-lotion) [33 27] MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY Between -. yel'ISetti Karthik .UPETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra ...RESPONDENT/COMPLA]NANT Pradesh counsel for the pet-ltioner/accused: 1. DIVYA.V counsel for the Respondent/COmPlainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the follow-lng ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Sect-Ions 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagar-lk SurakSha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner/A1, seek'lng regular ba" in Crime No.169 of 2024 of Dwaraka Police Station, VisakhaPatnam CommiSSiOnerate. -I, -=ch--TZ _`o t J=--I 2. A case has been registered agal-nst the petitl'oner hereI'n and others for the offence punI'Shable under sectI'On 80(1) of the Bharatjya Nyaya sanhjta, 2023 (for short fBNS"). 3. case of the prosecutI'On, jn br,'ef, I-s that, marriage between Al and one yelI|Setty Satya prl-ya (hereinafter referred to as fthe deceased') was solemnl-zed on 28.02.2024. At the tI.me of marriage the parents of the deceased presented Rs.4.5 crores of cash and other properties, 100 Kaasula gold, 4 1/2 kgS of silver towards dowry to A1. After three months of marriage, Al along with hI'S Parents A2 and A3 started harassl'ng the deceased demandl-ng to bring addl'tjonal dowry from her parents. unable to bear the harassment meted out to her by Al to A3, the deceased comml'tted suicide by hangl'ng herself I-n bedroom On 07.ll.2024. 4. Earll'er, Al to A3 filed ba" app"-catlons jn crl.p.Nos.9200, 9203 and 9404 of 2024 respectively and thl's court, vide common order dated 31.12.2024, dl'smjssed the ba" application of the petjtl'oner herel'n/Al and granted ba" to A2 and A3. pursuant to that, the present appljcatl®on has been fI'Ied by the Petjtl'oner/A 1. 3 // 5. Learnedrcounsel for the petI-tiOner Submitted that entire investigation l's over and charge sheet is also filed. Petitioner was arrested on 09.ll.2024 and since then he is in judicI-al remand for more than 80 days. 6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the police, after investigation, filed a preII'minary charge sheet and the final charge sheet could not be filed for want of analysis report, as the phone and Laptop seized from the possessI'On Of Petl'tiOner/Al were sent for recovery of data. 7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the I-mPleaded respondent No.2/de facfo complal-nant opposed the bail -' \ - application On the ground that if the petitI'Oner is released, there is every chance of tampering the evidence, as he is highly influential. 8. Heard. Perused the record. 9. When once major portion of investl-gatl'on I-S completed, for want of analysis report with regard to Laptop and phone belonging to the petitioner/A1, he need not be detained Ion J-udiCial remand forever. Once the Laptop and phone were seized by the police, the questI-On Of tamPering the evidence by the petitioner does not arise. lt is represented by the learned *=i== `_,--,--* 4 J/ counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner/Al I-s a Chartered- Accountant by professI®On. Hence, there is no flight risk, insofar as the petI'tiOner hereI-n I-S concerned and he has got a fixed place of abode. 10. ln view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail {o the petitioner/Al on the following condI'tiOnS. i) The petitioner/Al shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) wI'th two Sureties Of the like sum each to the sail-sfaction of the learned I AdditI'OnaI Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. ilo) Petitioner 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 Person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dl-ssuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer, iii) On release, the petitioner shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, once in a week i.e., on every I.€s¢ \_--. 3ffi 5 I. I saturday between 10.00 am and 01,00 pm, till filing Of the charge sheet. ll. Accordingly, the Crim'lnal Petition -lS allowed. //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT SECTION RAJ IJ TEAR To'1. The I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, VisakhaPatnam- 2. The Super'lntendent, Central Jail, VisakhaPatnam. 3. The Station House Officer, Dwaraka Police Stat'lon, V'lsakhaPatnam. 4. One CC to Ms. DIWA.V Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court Of Andhra PradeSh. [OUT] 6. One spare COPY ER I \\ Jr, 'v HIGH COURT SRK, J DATED :27/01 /2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.384 of 2025 ALLOWED ff#.S,.` ` - •2 9 ,jAN 2025