1 APHC010470682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9372/2025 Between: Nadava Arun Kumar Alias Arun Kumar ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. M CHALAPATHI 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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.96 of 2025 of Pamuru Police Station, Prakasam District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused herein for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 326 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2 CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The prosecution case is that on 06.08.2025 at about 4:00 a.m., the accused Arun Kumar, husband of the complainant Nadava Lakshmi Narayanamma, set fire to the bed in her rented house at Gopalapuram village, suspecting her fidelity and continuing harassment. The complainant, who had earlier left him due to ill-treatment and was residing separately, was at her parents’ house that night, and the cot and household articles were burnt. She lodged a report at the police station seeking action. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri M. Chalapathi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, and that there is no prima facie material or cogent evidence connecting the Petitioner to the commission of the crime. It is further contended that the Petitioner is the sole earning member of his family and that his incarceration would result in grave hardship and irreparable prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to comply with any condition that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper to impose while considering the prayer for grant of bail. 4. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is a permanent resident of Visakhapatnam and there exists no apprehension of his absconding or evading the due process of law. The Petitioner has extended full cooperation in the course of investigation and undertakes to continue such cooperation in 3 all future proceedings. It is also urged that the nature of the allegations does not necessitate custodial interrogation, and that the imposition of appropriate conditions would suffice to secure the ends of justice. In view of the foregoing, it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms.P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, asserting that the investigation is at a nascent and critical stage, with several material witnesses yet to be examined. It is submitted that the premature enlargement of the Petitioner on bail would be inimical to the sanctity and efficacy of the ongoing investigative process and may engender deliberate non-cooperation on the part of the Petitioner. The prosecution further raises an apprehension that, if released, the Petitioner may exert undue influence upon, or intimidate, prosecution witnesses, thereby impeding the administration of justice and vitiating the evidentiary foundation of the case. It is also contended that there exists a palpable and imminent risk of the Petitioner absconding, thereby frustrating the due process of law. 6. Mr. Ramineni Sudheer, learned Legal Aid Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent while reiterating the contentions of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and vehemently opposed for enlarging the petitioner on bail. 7. In view of the gravity and allegations, coupled with the potential threat posed to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioner is 4 not entitled to the indulgence of discretionary relief and it is urged to dismiss the present Criminal Petition. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 8. In view of the rival submissions advanced by both the learned Counsel and upon a perusal of the prosecutorial narrative, the pivotal issue now meriting for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioner is entitled for grant of bail?” ANALYSIS: 9. As seen from the record, the 2nd respondent/victim and the petitioner are wife and husband. The prosecution alleges that there were frequent quarrels between them and that the petitioner used to beat the 2nd respondent. On 06.08.2025, the petitioner went to the house of the 2nd respondent with an intention to quarrel, and in their absence, he opened the bedroom window, set fire, and left. Consequently, the double cot, mattress, and other household articles in the bedroom were gutted in flames. The petitioner was arrested on 17.08.2025 and has been in judicial custody for the past 40 days. The investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed. CONCLUSION: 10. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the Petitioner/Accused, his alleged role played in this case, and the period of 5 detention undergone by the Petitioner/Accused, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The Petitioner/Accused shall be enlarged on bail subject to the executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kanigiri. ii. The Petitioner/Accused shall not enter into the village of Gopalapuram until the examination of the L.W.1 and other prosecution witnesses. iii. The Petitioner/Accused shall appear on each and every adjournment before learned Court concerned. iv. The petitioner, in case indulges in any kind of offences against L.W.1 the investigation officer is at liberty to approach either this Court or the learned Sessions Judge concerned, for cancellation of the bail. 11. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date:26.09.2025 Note:- Issue C.C today B/o KMS 6 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9372 OF 2025 26.09.2025 KMS