APHC010676412025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12931/2025 Between: KODIGUDLA RAJ KUMAR, S/O. MAHESH, AGED 40 YEARS,OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O.NIMMALAVALASA VILLAGE,CHEEPURUPALLI MANDAL, VIJAYANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public ProsecutorHigh Court of Andhra Pradesh. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: AISHWARYA NAGULA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.12931 of 2025 Dated 24.12.2025 The Court made the following: ORDER: 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 Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.102 of 2025 of Cheepurupalli Police Station, Vizianagaram District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused herein for the offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 118(1) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. He is the sole breadwinner of the family. He was falsely implicated in this case. He is a law-abiding citizen. He has got fixed abode. He would abide by any condition which this Court deems fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail, and it is urged to allow the petition. 3. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, submits that the investigation is pending and the wound certificate has not yet been received. Some more material witnesses are to be examined. The petitioner is a rowdy‑sheeter. He has five cases registered under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, ‘the IPC’) and ‘the BNS’, and it is urged to dismiss the petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.12931 of 2025 Dated 24.12.2025 5. On perusal of the record, it was rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the alleged offence took place on 20.11.2025 at 08.00 AM, whereas the complaint was lodged by the de‑facto complainant on 23.11.2025 at 11.00 AM. It is alleged by the de‑facto complainant that the petitioner fisted him in his face and neck with force. He also beat him on his stomach with a crowbar, causing severe pain, and further strangulated him with both hands. The nature of the injuries suffered by the de‑facto complainant is not yet known. The petitioner is a rowdy‑sheeter. There are five cases pending against the petitioner. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the above five cases were closed, but no documents have been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner to show that those cases were closed. The Investigating Officer has not yet received wound certificate of the victim. Based on the allegations levelled by the victim, Section 109 of ‘the BNS’ has been added to the case. 6. In view of the pendency of the investigation, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 24.12.2025 PRA