Jr IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AM MONDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUAR TWOTHOUSANDANDTWENTYFIVE \ :PRESENT.- I?327 I a a. AVATl ap!E±H1-re-EH `E iBEEE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY`,seI- CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 725 OF 2025 E= Between : 1. Manigandan B, S/o Boopathi Aged about 32 years, Occ: Manager Employee code 342167 R/o 3rd street, Satyanagar, Vellore ,Tamil Nadu [A4] 2. V Madan Mohan, S/o V Malyadri Employee code 1-408867 Aged about 23 years, Occ: Employee R/o D.No ll, Venkannepalem village Kaligiri mandal.Dr B R Ambedkar Konaseena District [A-6] 3. Sumantha Dasu Aged about 27 years, Occ Employee, Employee ID 1-313544 R/o 91/3, J N Gupta Lane, Baidyabati, Hooghly, West Bengal. [A-5] AND Petitioners/Accused No.4,5 and 6'r The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through S.H.O AIamuru PS Represented by P P High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. Respondent/Complainant/ Petitl'on under section 482 of BNSS is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed I-n support of the criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioners/ Accused No.4 to 6 on Anticipatory '` Bail in the event of their arrest in Cr'lme No. 212 of 2024 dated 17.10.2024 on r7 the file of Alamuru PS , Dr B R Ambedkar Konaseena Distr-lot for OffenCeS punishable under Sections 331(4), 305, 210, 317(4) r/w 109 BNS. The petition/Appeal coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri SHAIK ASIF Advocate for the Petitioner, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) for the Respondent and the Court made the following. I/ THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NOI725 0F 20?± ORDER : The Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the BNSS, is filed on behalf of the petl'tioners herein/A4, A6 and A5 to grant anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.212 of 2024 of Alamuru Police Station, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Konaseema District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 331 (4), 305, 210, 317 (4) r/w 109 BNS. 2. lt is the case of prosecution that I-n-laws' house of defacto COmPlainant iS Situated at Jonnada Village, Alamuru Mandal, and about one month ago, his in-laws went to Hyderabad and have been staying there. On the evening of 15.10.2024, the defacto complainant, along with his wife, came to his in-laws' house, took some gold ornaments from the house, placed the remaining gold ornaments in the wooden safe, locked the doors, and left. on 17.10.2024 in the morning, the defacto complainant came to know that the house doors of his in-laws' house at Jonnada Village were broken open. He immediately rushed there and noticed that unknown offenders had gained entry by breaking the latches of the front door. The defacto complainant entered the house and found that gold ornaments weighing about 43 sov., and worth approximately Rs.8,60,000/-were stolen. 3. Heard. Perused the record. 4. The learned counsel forthe petitioners submits thatthe petitioners are respectable c'ltizens in the society and the police are trying to implicate them falsely without any crime having been committed by the petitl-oners. The provision of Section 317(4) BNS requires the mandatory --ci7f=-------Er| I Ingredient of the word llhabltua'", but in thl's case, no antecedents are vlsible. The petitI'Oners are absolutely Innocent and have allegedly been falsely imp'jcated l'n this case. 5 The learned Assistant pub"c prosecutor strongly opposed the ba" on the ground that the jnvestI'gatl'on has not been completed. 6. on perusal of material on record, jt is evI'dent that the a"egations against the petjtI-Oners are vague and bald, wl-th no other material to connect them to the crI'me, except the accusatl'on. Mere omjssl-on in produclng documents does not fa" wlthln the purvl-ew of habl-tuaI offenders. ln view of the aforesaI'd facts and circumstances of the case, thl's court is jnclI'ned to conslder request of pet,'tl'oners for grant of antjcipatory bal'l. 7. Accordlngly, Ion the event of thelr arrest, petl'tl'oners herel-n/A4, A6 and A5 sha" be released on ba" on each of them executI'ng a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) wlth two suretles each for the lI-ke sum each to the satlsfaction of the arresting polI'Ce offlc,als, and also on condl'tl'on that the petjtIOners sha" make themselves aval'lable for investlgatl'on as and when required and that they shall not cause anv thraa+ ;I-I,----- any threat, inducement or promise to the Prosecution wl'tnesses. The petl'tl'oners sha" appear before the statl'on House offlcer concerned once I-n a week i.e., on every saturday between 10.00 a.m. and o1.00 p.m., tI-ll fill'ng of the charge sheet. lt I'S made clear that the petltl'oners sha" scrupulously comply wl'th the above condltlons and breach of any of the above condI'tlOnS WI'll be i_lr-<a EEEEEE]r I, vlewed serIOusly and prosecutlon JS at llberty to move an appIJCatlon for cancellation of the bail. 8. Accordingly, the cr,'mjnal petI'tl'On l's a"owed sD/-SK MD RAFl r` I. i u To, //TRUE COPY// For/ ASSISTANT#GlSTRAR SECTION OFFICER 1. The station House offI'Cer, AIamuru ps , Dr B R Ambedkar Konaseena DI'Strjct. 2. One cc to sRl. SHAIKASIF Advocate [opuc] 3. Two ccs to public prosecutor (AP) H,'gh court ofA P., AmaravatI' [OUT]. 4. One spare copy - HIGH COURT SRK,J DATED : 10/02/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.725 of 2025 ALLOWED ~f=as:=asiir-:gr ¥!S,¥¥--€if,~= A %?t© Life [:._.`i::I. :.:.`