APHC010501772025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9873/2025 Between: Sri Sakalabhaktula Neelakanteswara Rao ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. R SIVA SAI SWARUP Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: This criminal petition has been filed, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by the petitioner/accused No.1 seeking for granting of pre-arrest bail to them in crime No.68 of 2025 of Prohibition & Excise Station, Pathapatnam, Srikakulam District, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 34(a) R/W 34 (1)(ii) & 36(1)(i) & 37 (a) r/w 37(1) & 37(c) r/w 37(1) of A.P.Excise Act, 1968 and Rules 31(1), 35 and 42 of the 2 Andhra Pradesh Excise (Grant of License of Selling by Shops and Conditions of License) Rules, 2024. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. This Court in Crl.P.No.9385 of 2025 on 17.09.2025 granted pre-arrest bail to accused No.2. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there is one similar adverse antecedent reported against the petitioner/accused No.1. However, the learned Single Judge of this Court in I.A.No.2 of 2024 in Crl.P.No.469 of 2024 on 31.01.2024 stayed the further proceedings in Crime No.121 of 2023 on the file of SEB Station, Kotabommali, Srikakulam District including the arrest of the present petitioner, who was shown as accused No.4. The 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. 4. 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 1 SLP (Crl.) Nos. 6588 of 2025 3 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." 5. 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 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 2 Crl. Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No. 17805 of 2024 etc. 4 record any reason for directly granting anticipatory bail without impleading the appellant-complainant as a party." 6. Be that as it may, since the petitioner has not approached learned Sessions Judge concerned at the first instance and directly approached this Court for grant of pre-arrest bail without establishing any special case or showing extraordinary circumstance, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief. However, the petitioner is permitted to move an appropriate application before learned Sessions Judge concerned for grant of pre-arrest bail. 7. In view of the above, the criminal petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner/accused No.1 to approach learned Sessions Judge and make an application for grant of pre-arrest bail within a period of one (01) week from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Until such time, no coercive steps shall be taken by the police against the petitioner/Accused No.1. However, the investigating officer shall proceed with the investigation. The petitioner/ accused No.1 shall cooperate with the investigating officer. 8. The criminal petition is accordingly disposed of. _______________________ Dr.Y.LAKSHMANA RAO, J. Date: 13.10.2025, S D P 5 96 HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE Y.LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9873 OF 2025 DATE: 13.10.2025 S D P