APHC010598712025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11556/2025 Between: Tutta Appalaraju ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. CHITTIMURI RAGHAVULU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 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/Accused No.3 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.200 of 2025 of Prohibition and Excise Police Station, Prathipadu, Kakinada District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 7(B) read 8(B) of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition and Excise Act, 1995. 2 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. As seen from the record, the allegation against the petitioner is that, with the assistance of the other accused, he indulged in preparing 40 litres of illicit liquor and 500 kgs of block jaggery liquid. The petitioner also has similar adverse antecedents. The petitioner had earlier filed a petition in Crl.P.No.10688 of 2025 seeking quashment of FIR No.200 of 2025; however, that petition was disposed of directing the petitioner to appear before the learned Trial Court. The petitioner was also granted liberty to file a fresh petition after the filing of the charge sheet. 4. A Single Judge of this Court, in Crl.P.No.5843 of 2025, on 24.06.2025, allowed the petition of Accused No.2, directing him to surrender before the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class within 15 days, considering his age of 72 years. 5. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation has not yet been completed. In view of the above, the Criminal Petition has no merits and is liable to be dismissed. 6. Therefore, request for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner does not appear to be convincing or reasonable. Furthermore, importantly grant of pre- arrest bail to the petitioner, against whom specific overt acts grave in nature are alleged, is neither a license for commission of serious offence nor a shield or protection for having committed grave offences, as per the decisions of the 3 Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab 1and Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)2. There are no merits in the petition. The Petitioner/Accused No.3 is disentitled for grant of pre-arrest bail. 7. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner requests this Court to grant liberty to the Petitioner/Accused No.3 to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate concerned and move an appropriate application for his release before the Court concerned. 8. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the Petitioner/Accused No.3 to surrender before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate concerned within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order and move an appropriate application before the learned Jurisdictional Court for enlarging him on bail. The learned Jurisdictional Court shall endeavour to dispose of the application on its own merits in accordance with law by giving due and sufficient opportunity to both sides and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time, preferably within two (02) days. ________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 14.11.2025 KMS 1 (1980) 2 SCC 565 2 (2020) 5 SCC 1 4 40 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.11556 of 2025 Date:14.11.2025 KMS