1 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 APHC010008922025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NOs: 239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 1.CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 239/2025 Between: 1. SHAIK BOBJAN @ BABJAN, S/O.MAHABOOB SAHEB AGED 52 YEARS, OCC. REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O. DOOR NO.3-51, THATTIVARIPALLI ROAD, KONDAMARRIPALLE VILLAGE AND POST, MADANAPALLE MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. 2. JINKA CHALAPATHI @ GINKA VENKATA CHALAPATHI,, S/O. JINKA VENKATESWARLU @ GINKA VENKATESH, AGED 58 YEARS, OCC. VICE CHAIRMAN OF MADANAPALLE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, R/O. DOOR N0.17-182-B, GANDHI ROAD, MADANAPALLE TOWN, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, through Madanapalle I Town Police Station, Annamayya District, rep. by its Public Prosecutor CB-CID, High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): RAJENDRA C Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 2. CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9824/2024 Between: VANKIREDDY MADHAVA REDDY, S/O. LATE NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC. REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO. 2-50-F-15, REDDYS COLONY, MADANAPALLE TOWN ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, through Madanapalle I Town Police Station, Annamayya District, rep. by its Public Prosecutor CB-CID, High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: RAJENDRA C Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 3.CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 603/2025 Between: VANKIREDDY MADHAVA REDDY, S/O. LATE NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO. 2-50-F-15, REDDYS COLONY. MADANAPALLE TOWN, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, through Madanapalle I Town Police Station, Annamayya District, rep. by its Public Prosecutor CB-CID High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: RAJENDRA C 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 4. CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 633/2025 Between: BALLAPURAM MUNI THUKARAM, S/O.MUNI VENKATAPPA, AGED 64 YEARS, OCC RETIRED TEACHER, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PLOT NO.109, VASUNDARA APARTMENT, OPP D-MART, KARAKAMBADI ROAD TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT C/O.RAMMOHAN PASUPULETI, 412 SANCHOS CIRCLE. APT 412, OFALLON, MISSOURI, 63368. USA. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, through Madanapalle I Town Station, Annamayya District, rep. by its Public Prosecutor CB-CID, High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: RAJENDRA C Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: These four Criminal Petitions are heard and disposed of by this common order, albeit the petitioners are different and the crimes are distinct, the nature of the offence is one and the same. 2. These four Criminal Petitions have been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNSS‟) 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 by the Petitioners/Accused for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.135 of 2024 of Madanapalle I Town Police Station, Annamayya District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 326 (g), 316 (5) and 61 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNS‟), Section 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. The Crime No.141 of 2024 of Madanapalle I Town Police Station, Annamayya District, was registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 336 (2), 337, 339, 303 (2), 305, 317 (2), 317 (5) and 238 of „the BNS‟. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 3. The case of the prosecution in Cr.No.135 of 2024 is that, on 22-07- 2024 at 08:00 A.M., C. Hari Prasad, Revenue Divisional Officer, Madanapalle, lodged a complaint regarding a fire accident at the Sub Collector‟s Office, Madanapalle. On 21-07-2024 at about 11:25 PM, B. Ramanaiah, Village Revenue Assistant, Agraharam Village, while on night duty, noticed fire in the eastern part of the office. He attempted to control it but failed. He then informed to G. Thapaswini, Deputy Tahsildar, who in turn informed the Camp Clerk to the RDO. The Camp Clerk contacted the Station Fire Officer, Madanapalle, who immediately arrived with firemen and fire tenders. Efforts were made to save files and 5 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 computer systems, but due to the intensity of the flames, many items were destroyed. The Electricity Department was informed, and power supply was cut off to prevent further spread. The Collector & District Magistrate, Annamayya District, was also informed. The fire was finally brought under control by 12:45 AM with the assistance of another fire tender. The damage included several computer systems, monitors, a Xerox machine, printers, scanners, and important files. No human injuries were reported. 4. The case of the prosecution in Cr.No.141 of 2024 is that, on 29-07- 2024 at 04:00 AM, it was reported that a search and seizure had been conducted on 28-07-2024 from 10:10 AM to 03:05 PM at the residence of A.M. Sashikanth, S/o Late A. Krishna Murthy, in connection with Cr.No.135 of 2024 (Accidental Fire) of Madanapalle I Town Police Station. The Investigating Officer, suspecting possible sabotage to destroy evidence of irregularities in lucrative land-related matters involving forgery, falsification of documents, and possible theft of government records, considered the search necessary to recover incriminating material. Certain documents were seized under a Seizure Mahazarnama and submitted for further action in accordance with law. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSELS FOR THE PETITIONERS: 6 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 5. The learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and they have not committed any offence as alleged. The Petitioners are the sole earning members of their families, and arrest would cause irreparable hardship to dependents. The Petitioners are willing to abide by any conditions that this Court may deem fit and proper for the grant of anticipatory bail. 6. It is further submitted that there is no recovery attributable to the Petitioners and custodial interrogation is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Petitioners have cooperated with the investigation and there is no likelihood of their absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Therefore, it is prayed that this Court may be pleased to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/Accused in the interest of justice. ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: 7. Per contra, Mr.Neelotphal Ganji, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed anticipatory bail, contending that without approaching the learned Sessions Judge at first instance, the Petitioners filed these four Petitions directly before this Court, such procedure is contrary to the order of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in 7 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 Mohammed Rasal.C v. State of Kerala1 case, and it is urged to dismiss these four Criminal Petitions. 8. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. I have perused the entire records. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 9. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, now the point for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioners/Accused are entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?” ANALYSIS: 10. Without going into the merits of the matter, it is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor that these four applications have been filed under Section 482 of „the BNSS‟, seeking for grant of pre-arrest bail without approaching the learned Sessions Judge concerned at first instance. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in 1Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) Nos. 6588 of 2025, dated 08.09.2025. 8 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 Mohammed Rasal.C supra wherein at paragraph Nos.7, 8 and 9 it was held as follows:- “7. The Sessions Judge exercises powers under Section 438 Cr.P.C in relation to all cases registered with the police stations in the particular District. This area-wise distribution of work would make it much more convenient and facilitate expeditious disposal, if the application for pre-arrest bail is first filed before the Sessions Court which would have a direct and first-hand assistance of the concerned Public Prosecutor appointed for that particular District. The Sessions Court would also have an immediate access to the Case Diary thereby facilitating a better appreciation of facts of the case. 8. We further feel that if the practice of entertaining the applications for pre-arrest bail directly in the High Court is encouraged, and the parties concerned are not relegated to first approach the Sessions Court concerned, the High Court would be flooded with a spate of pre-arrest bail applications thereby creating a chaotic situation. We say so, because if the parties are required to approach the Sessions Court concerned for seeking remedy of pre- arrest bail, there is a strong probability that significant number of applications would be allowed at that level only thereby acting as a filtration process before the process reaches the High Court. 9. It is trite that in most of the States, there is a consistent practice requiring the litigant concerned to first approach the Sessions Court for seeking relief of pre-arrest bail and only in the event of denial of such relief, the litigant would be granted access to approach the High Court for seeking such relief. This is, of course, subject to just exceptions and the High Court, for reasons to be recorded, may entertain an application for pre-arrest bail directly in special/ extra- ordinary circumstances.” 9 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 11. Albeit this Court has got concurrent jurisdiction under Section 482 of „the BNSS‟, such discretionary relief would only be granted, when the Petitioners establish a special case or extra ordinary circumstance. As seen from the averments, the Petitioners neither established a special case nor extra-ordinary circumstance. This Court granted interim orders on an earlier occasion, and the same have been extended from time to time till date. However, in view of the order passed in Mohammed Rasal.C supra, this Court is not inclined to exercise its discretionary power to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, as they have not approached the learned Sessions Judge concerned at first instance. CONCLUSION: 12. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, these four Criminal Petitions are disposed of, granting liberty to the Petitioners/Accused to approach the learned Sessions Judge concerned and move appropriate applications for grant of pre-arrest bail within a period of one (01) week from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Until such time, the interim orders granted earlier are extended. It is made clear that if the petitioners do not approach the learned Sessions Judge as mentioned above, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. 10 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 13. Any observations made in this order shall not hinder the learned Sessions Judge concerned from independently applying his mind and passing appropriate orders on merits in accordance with law, after giving due and sufficient opportunity to both sides. 14. With the above direction, these four Criminal Petitions are disposed of. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Dated: 18.09.2025 RSI 11 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated 18.09.2025 184 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION Nos:239, 603, 633 of 2025 & 9824 of 2024 Dated: 18.09.2025 RSI