APHC010562332025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10915/2025 Between: 1.VAJRALA TARAK PRATAP REDDY, S/O. CHANDRAMOULI REDDY,AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC. EMPLOYEE,R/O. D.NO. 59- 2-247, OLD GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Station House Officer, CCPS, CID Police Station, Mangalgiri Guntur District, AP. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.PAPUDIPPU SASHIDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.5 on bail in Crime No.16 of 2025 of CCPS, 2 CID Police Station, Mangalagiri, Guntur District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.1herein for the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B)read with Sections 196, 353, 111(3), (4), (5), 143 read with 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’) and Section 66(c) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for brevity ‘the IT Act’). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. Originally, the CCPS, CID Police Station, Mangalagiri registered a case in FIR No.16 of 2025 on 09.09.2025 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 196, 353 read with 61(2) of ‘the BNS’ and 66(c) of ‘the IT Act.’ 4. The role of the Petitioner/Accused No.5 has come into light based on the confession give by Accused No.3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits orally that against Accused No.4 Section 41-A of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ notice was issued and her confession was record, and against Accused No.6, the learned Magistrate returned her remand report. 5. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the Facebook account is not belonging to Accused No.5. Except the confession no material is available. Therefore, the provisions of Section 143 of ‘the BNS’ could not be applicable and it is urged to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.5 on bail. 6. As seen from the record, the Petitioner was arrested on 24.09.2025. He has been in the judicial custody for the past 41 days. Police custody was taken for one day. So far only four witnesses were examined. 3 7. The Investigation Officer, CCPS, CID Police Station, Mangalagiri added Sections 111(3), (4) & (5) and Section 143 of ‘the BNS’ vide memo filed before the learned VI Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur. Whether particular Sections are applicable or not cannot be gone into at this juncture. Investigation is at progressive stage. 8. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is at nascent stage. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that certain bank transactions happened in between the Petitioner and Accused No.3, merits of the matter cannot be gone into in this stage. 9. In view of the stage of the investigation, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the Petitioner on bail. Hence, the criminal Petition is dismissed for the present. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 04.11.2025 VTS