[3521] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE rPRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11473 OF 2025 Ti an s Between: 1. Maneni Srilatha, W/o. M. Erikilappa, aged about 37 years, R/o. H.No. 4- 17/A,Gunjepalli village, Mudigubba Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District.(A7) 2. Chiyeti Jayamma, W/o.— ,aged about 37 years, R/o. Gunjepalli village,Mudigubba Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District.(A8) 3. K Krishna Veni @ Krishnamma, W/o. Kesanna, aged about 57 years, R/o. H.No. 1-51, Jonnalakottapalli village, Mudigubba Mandal,Sri Satya Sai District. .(A13) 4. K Lakshmi Devi, W/o. K. Sudhakar,aged about 44 years, R/o. H.No. 1- 198, Jonnalakottapalli village, Mudigubba Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District (A14) Petitioners/Accused AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Station House Officer, Mudigubba P.S.,Anantapur district presently Sri Satya Sai District,Through its Public Prosecutor,High Court of A.P., Amaravathi. Respondent/Complainant Petition under Sections 482 of BNSS (old 438 of Cr.P.C), praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners/accused No.7,8,13 and 14 in the event of their arrest in Crime No 228 of 2021 on the file of Mudigubba Police Station, Anantapur District Now Sri Satya Sai District. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri E ANJANA REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioners and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent and the Court made the following: APHC010594392025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] 0^ WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11473/2025 Between: Maneni Srilatha and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1.E ANJANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 1. The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioner Nos.1 to 4/Accused Nos.7, 8, 13 and 14 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.228 of 2021 of Mudigubba Police Station, Anantapur District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘the I.P.C’). , 2 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. The case of prosecution is that the de facto complainant gave a report to the police against the petitioners alleging that the Scheme during the year 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 in Mudigubba Mandal, misappropriated the government funds to a tune of Rs.12,41,000/- which was allotted to the beneficiaries and cheated the government and caused mischief to the public money. Basing on the complainant made by the de facto complainant, police registered the same as a case in Cr.No.228 of 2021 of Mudigubba Police Station, Anantapur District for the offences punishable under Section 409 and 420 of Indian Penal Code and the petitioners arrayed as accused No.6 and 12. As seen from the record. Accused Nos.7, 8, 13 and 14 are alleged to have misused a Government scheme. Consequently, Sections 409 and 420 of the I.P.C. were added to FIR No.228 of 2021 on 25.09.2021. Nearly four years have passed. The Mandal Development Officer lodged the complaint. In Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd v. State of Uttar Pradesh^ the Hon’ble Apex Court observed that the offences of criminal breach of trust and cheating cannot coexist simultaneously. In N. Raghavender v. State of Andhra Pradesh^ wherein the Hon’ble 4. 5. 6. Apex Court observed that prosecution had failed to prove charges under Section 409, 420, and 477A of ‘the I.P.C.,’ and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1 )(d) of ‘the Act.,’ on the ground that no financial loss was caused to the bank, or to any customer; no conspiracy was established; the bank official r- ' Crl.A.No.3114 of 2024 dated 23.08.2025 ^ Crl.A.No.5 of 2010 dated 13.12.2021 3 committed gross misconduct by misusing his position, by acting himself in dereliction of his duties, but there was no criminal misconduct fall under the ambit of Section 409, 420 and 477A of ‘the I.P.C’. Sections 409 and 420 of ‘the I.P.C.,’ relating to criminal breach of trust 7. and cheating, would not go together. A learned Single Judge of this Court, in Crl.P.No.7361 of 2021, enlarged Accused Nos.6 and 12 on pre-arrest bail. The petitioners are also standing on 8. a similar footing as Accused Nos.6 and 12. I Considering the facts and circumstances, the gravity and nature of the 9. allegations leveled the Petitioner Nos.1 to 4/Accused Nos.7, 8, 13 and 14, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner Nos.1 to 4/Accused Nos.7, 8, 13 and 14. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: In the event of his arrest, the Petitioner Nos.1 to 4/Accused Nos.7, 8, 13 and 14 shall be enlarged on bail subject to them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; The Petitioner Nos.1 to 4/Accused Nos.7, 8, 13 and 14 shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required; The Petitioner Nos.1 to 4/Aecused Nos.7, 8, 13 and 14 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; The Petitioner Nos.1 to 4/Accused Nos.7, 8, 13 and 14 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned once in a week i.e., on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet. The Petitioner Nos.1 to 4/Accused Nos.7, 8, 13 and 14 shall not leave the district limits without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. The Petitioner Nos.1 to 4/Accused Nos.7, 8, 13 and 14 shall surrender her passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If she I. ii. III. IV. V. VI. 4 claims that she does not have passport, she shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. SD/- G.HELANAIDU DEPUTY R^STRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// I To, 1. The Station House Officer, Mudigubba Police Station, Anantapur District Now Sri Satya Sai District One CC to SRI. E ANJANA REDDY Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT] One spare copy 2. 3. 4. KJ HIGH COURT DR.YLR.J DATED: 19/11/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.11473 of 2025 ALLOWED