1 APHC010567852025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11022/2025 Between: Lukman Khari and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 6 on bail in Crime No.43 of 2025 of RSASTF Police Station, Tirupati District, was registered against the Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 6 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) read with 3(5), 49, 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2 2023 (for short ‘the BNS’) and Sections 20(1)(d)(1)(a) read with 20(1)(c) ii, iii, iv, x, 36(a) r/w 32A, 29(4)(a)(i) of the A.P. Forest Amendment Act, 2016. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. The petitioners were arrested on 08.09.2025. They have been in judicial custody for the past 55 days. The allegations against the petitioners are that Accused Nos.1 and 2 acted as coolies; Accused No.4 acted as the pilot; Accused No.5 was the driver of the Santro car; and Accused No.6 was the driver of the Bolero vehicle in which 31 red sanders logs and 5 red sander roots, weighing about 712 kilograms, were transported. 4. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that Accused No.3 has one similar criminal antecedent; Accused No.4 has one similar criminal antecedent; and Accused No.5 has three similar criminal antecedents. There are no adverse criminal antecedents reported against Accused Nos.1 and 2, who acted as coolies. So far, seven witnesses have been examined. They are all official witnesses. Substantial portion of the investigation, insofar as the involvement of Petitioner Nos.1 and 2/Accused Nos.1 and 2 is concerned, has been completed. The investigation further reveals that Accused Nos.4 to 6 had direct contact or access with Accused No.12, who is alleged to be the main smuggler. 3 5. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2, this Court is inclined to enlarge petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail. In respect of petitioner Nos.3 to 6/accused Nos.3 to 6, the investigation is not yet completed and some more witnesses are to be examined to elicit further information. Hence, the request for grant of bail to petitioner Nos.3 to 6/accused Nos.3 to 6 is not found convincing and reasonable at this stage. 6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed by dismissing the request of petitioner Nos.3 to 6/accused Nos.3 to 6 while enlarging petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail, subject to the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to they executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) each, with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Trial of Cases Relating to Red Sander Smuggling, tirupati. ii. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. 4 iv. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. vii. The petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall surrender their passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If they claim that they do not have a passport, they shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 03.11.2025 S D P 5 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11022 OF 2025 03.11.2025 S D P