APHC010503932025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9914/2025 Between: 1. BELLAM PREETHAN AKASH, S/O. BELLAM VENKATA SUBBARAO, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/O. D.NO.7-311/1, RAMAIAH NAGAR, SOUTH BYPASS ROAD, KURNOOL ROAD, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM, ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, Through Krishnagiri P.S, Kurnool District High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. YERRAMSETTY SATYA SOWMYA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This criminal petition has been filed, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking for granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner-accused No. 2 in crime No. 64 of 2025 of Krishnagiri Police Station, Kurnool District, registered for the offence punishable under Section 8 (c) read with Sections 22 (b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that his brother-accused No. 1 was found in possession of 10 Grams of Cocaine. It is a commercial quantity. The role of the petitioner has come into light based on the confession of his brother-accused No. 1. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-accused No. 2 and his brother-accused No. 1 are not in good terms. Therefore, the petitioner was falsely implicated by his brother. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner, without approaching learned Sessions Judge concerned at the first instance, directly approached this Court for grant of pre-arrest bail and there is no special case shown or extraordinary circumstance established. 3 5. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Mohammed Rasal C and another v. State of Kerala and another1 held at para Nos. 7 to 9 as under: “7.The Sessions Judge exercises powers under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in relation to all cases registered with the police stations in the particular District. This area-wise distribution of work would make it much more convenient and facilitate expeditious disposal, if the application for pre-arrest bail is first filed before the Sessions Court which would have a direct and first-hand assistance of the concerned Public Prosecutor appointed for that particular District. The Sessions Court would also have an immediate access to the Case Diary thereby facilitating a better appreciation of facts of the case. 8. We further feel that if the practice of entertaining the applications for pre-arrest bail directly in the High Court is encouraged, and the parties concerned are not relegated to first approach the Sessions Court concerned, the High Court would be flooded with a spate of pre-arrest bail applications thereby creating a chaotic situation. We say so, because if the parties are required to approach the Sessions Court concerned for seeking remedy of pre-arrest bail, there is a strong probability that significant number of applications would be allowed at that level only thereby acting as a filtration process before the process reaches the High Court. 9. It is trite that in most of the States, there is a consistent practice requiring the litigant concerned to first approach the Sessions Court for seeking relief of pre-arrest bail and only in the event of denial of such relief, the litigant would be granted access to approach the High Court for seeking such relief. This is, of course, subject to just exceptions and the High Court, for reasons to be recorded, may entertain an application for pre-arrest bail directly in special/extra-ordinary circumstances." 6. In Jagdeo Prasad v. State of Bihar and others2, the Hon'ble Apex Court held at para No. 6 as under: "6. However, before parting, we do wish to express our sincere concern with the haste at which the High Court has dealt with this matter. While the scheme of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (now Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) provides concurrent jurisdiction to the High Court and Sessions Court for entertaining applications for anticipatory bail, this Court has time and again observed that High Court should always encourage exhausting an alternative/concurrent remedy before directly interfering itself. This approach balances the interests of all the stakeholders, first by giving 1 SLP (Crl.) Nos. 6588 of 2025 2 Crl. Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No. 17805 of 2024 etc. 4 the aggrieved party a round of challenge before the High Court. Second, this approach provides the High Court an opportunity to assess the judicial perspective so applied by the Sessions Court, in concurrent jurisdiction, instead of independently applying its mind from the first go. Further, the High Court fails to record any reason for directly granting anticipatory bail without impleading the appellant- complainant as a party." 7. Be that as it may, the petitioner has not made out any special case or extraordinary circumstance for granting the relief of pre-arrest bail without approaching learned Sessions Judge concerned at the first instance. However, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to grant liberty to the petitioner to surrender before learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class concerned and move appropriate application before learned Sessions Judge concerned. 8. The petitioner is therefore permitted to surrender before learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class concerned within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and move appropriate application before learned Sessions Judge concerned. Learned Sessions Judge concerned is directed to dispose of the application on its own merits in accordance with law by giving due and sufficient opportunity to learned counsel on both sides. 9. The criminal petition is disposed of accordingly. _______________________ Dr. Y.LAKSHMANA RAO, J. Date: 16-10-2025, JSK 5 HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE Y.LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9914 OF 2025 DATE: 16-10-2025 JSK