IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4363 OF 2025 Between: 1. Chinthapalli @ Sattenapalli Peda Saida @ Pantulu, S/o China Masthanvali @ Nanne, Aged about 43 years Occ Agriculturalist, R/o Pinnelli Village, Machavaram Mandal Palnadu District. 2. Chinthapalli Allabakshu, S/o Peda Bude Aged about 26 years, Occ Agriculturalist R/o Pinnelli Village, Machavaram Mandal Palnadu District. ...Petitioners/Accused No.2 & 3 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh. ...Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS (Old Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C), praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No. 2 and 3 on regular bail in Crime No. 16 of 2025, on the file of the Machavaram Police Station, Palnadu District. Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Ramalakshmana Reddy Sanepalli Counsel for the Respondent : Assistant Public Prosecutor. The Court made the following ORDER: APHC010206192025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4363/2025 [3369] Between: Chinthapalli @ Sattenapalli Peda ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) Saida @ Pantulu and Others AND ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT The State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused{S): 1.RAMALAKSHMANA REDDY SANEPALLl Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order: This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, has been filed by the petitioners herein/A2 and A3, seeking regular bail, in Crime No. 16 of 2025 of Machavaram Police Station, Palnadu District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 307, 506 and 509 read with 34 IPC. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant stated that he is working as an agricultural laborer along with his wife. He is a Telugu Desam Party (TDP) worker and several individuals from Muslim Community in his village have repeatedly threatened him to leave TDP and join YSRCP. Due 2. 2 to their threats, he had to leave his village for some time. When he returned in 2023, they continued to harass and threaten him. On 17.05.2023, while he was drinking tea at a local shop, A1 to A8 attacked him with iron rods and sticks and caused severe injuries. His wife was also assaulted when she tried to help him. Some villagers rescued and took him to the hospital. Fearing further attacks, his wife and himself stayed with relatives. On 28.03.2025, the complainant lodged a report before Basing on the said report, the police Machavaram Police. registered a case in Crime No. 16 of 2025 under Sections 323, During the course of 324, 307, 506 read with 34 IPC. investigation. Section 326 IPC was added. Heard. Perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been in judicial custody from 29.03.2025 and they are agriculturists and 1®‘ petitioner/A2 is a disabled person and they have nothing to do with the offence alleged. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor 4. 5. vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners on the ground that investigation in the present crime is not completed. A perusal of the material on record goes to show that the incident in question is said to have occurred on 17.05.2023, 6. ! 3 while the report was lodged on 29.03.2025, resulting in a delay of more than 20 months in filing the report. Moreover, the report does not disclose the reason for this delay, other than mentioning the change of government. It is unclear from the report why the report was delayed until the change of government, as the incident in question held two years back and most of the investigation might have completed by this time. 7. Since the accused have been in judicial custody for more than one month, this Court finds that most of the investigation might have been completed pertaining to the role played by the petitioners in the commission of the offence and any further detention of the petitioners is not required to conduct further investigation. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that prosecution has obtained police custody of the petitioners and the custody period is also over. It is submitted by the learned Assisted Public Prosecutor that as many as 12 witnesses were examined in the present crime. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners herein, on the following conditions. i. The petitioners herein shall be released on executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand i .€ 4 only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Piduguralla. ii. On release, the 2"^ petitioner/A3 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Sunday, between 10.00 AM and 01.00 PM., fora period of three (3) months, iii. The petitioners herein/A2 and A3 shall themselves available for investigation as and when required and that they shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. make 9. SDI- P.VINOD KUMAR GISTRAR ASSISTAN 0-^ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER F To, 1. The Additional Junior Civil Judge, Piduguralla. 2. The Station House Officer, Machavaram Police Station District. 3. The Superintendent, Guruazala Sub Jail. 4. One CC to Sri Ramalakshmana Reddy Sanepalli, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCS to Public Prosecutor (AP) High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. One spare copy Palnadu cvss ■ \ HIGH COURT TMR,J DATED:05/05/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.4363 of 2025 ALLOWED m o\i o n 05 IJ i3 S§SPAT^