IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER v TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE v ; PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE bR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10181 OF 2025 Between: 1. Bhumireddy Bala Nagi Reddy, aged 51 years, S/o Nalgava Nagi Reddy alias Yerrabbi, alias Nagi Reddy,D.No.2/113-7-4, Maheswara Nagar, Yerraguntia town and Mandal,YSR Kad^a district. Native of Chinna Dudyala village, Muddanur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District 2. Bhumireddy Lakshmi Prasad Reddy, aged 47 years, S/o ChinnaNagi Reddy, alias Nagi Reddy, alias Yerrabbi, D.No.1/86,Chinna Dudyala village, Muddanur mandal, YSR Kadapa dist. ■ U'-' Petitioner/Accused isSl_ AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through SHO, Muddanur Police Station, Muddanur, YSR District, Kadapa, Represented by the Learned Public Prosecutor, Hon'ble High Court of A.P. at Amaravati Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS, 2023 is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner/accused No. 1 & 2 on Regular Bail in Crime No. 365 of 2025 of Muddanur Police Station, in CrI.M.P.2045 of 2025, on the file of the Court of The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jammalarnadugu and release the petitioner/accused No.1 & 2 on bail Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri K.Srinivas ^ Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING APHC010518082025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [^0 [3521] 0 TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10181/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED{S) Bhumireddy Bala Nagi Reddy and Others AND ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT The State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1.K SRI NIVAS Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The 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 petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail in Crime No.365 of 2025 on the file of Muddanur Police Station, Kadapa District, registered against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 herein for the offence punishable under 2 Sections 118(1), 351(2) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: Material averments stemming from the case of the prosecution are that on 21.08.2025 at 9.30 a.m., at the revenue fields of Chinna Dudyala Village of Muddanur Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, accused No.1 pushed the defacto complainant, as a result he fell down on the ground. Then accused No.2 attacked the defacto complainant with an axe on his head. When the defacto complainant tried to restrain accused No.2, he received bleeding injury on his left index finger. Thereafter, all the accused threatened him with dire consequences. Immediately, defacto complainant was shifted to Government General Hospital, Proddatur, for treatement. 2. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS: Sri K.Srinivas, learned Counsel for the Petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 submits that the Petitioners are innocents and have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, and that there is no prima facie material or cogent evidence connecting the Petitioners to the commission of the crime. It is further contended that the Petitioners are the sole earning members of their families and that their incarceration would result in grave hardship and irreparable prejudice to their dependents. The Petitioners undertakes to 3. 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 Petitioners are permanent residents of Chinna Dudyala Village, Muddanurmandal, YSR Kadapa District and there exists no apprehension of their absconding or evading the due process of law. The Petitioners have extended full cooperation in the course of investigation and undertakes to continue such cooperation in 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. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners have been in judicial custody for the past 44 days. In view of the foregoing, it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms.P. Akila 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 Petitioners 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 Petitioners. The prosecution further raises an apprehension that, if released, the 4 Petitioners 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 Petitioners absconding, thereby frustrating the due process of law. In view of the gravity and allegations, coupled with the potential threat posed to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioners are not entitled to the indulgence of discretionary relief and it is urged to dismiss the present Criminal Petition. 6. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 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: 7. Whether the Petitioners are entitled for grant of bail? ANALYSIS: 8. This is the second bail application. Earlier, this Court dismissed the first bail application of the accused Nos.1 and 2 vide order dated 15.09.2025 in Crl.P.No.9303 of 2025 while enlarging accused Nos.4 and 5 on bail. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that on 19.09.2025 charge sheet was filed after completion of the entire investigation. 5 CONCLUSION: Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioners, their alleged roles played in this case, and the period of detention undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail with the following stringent conditions: 9. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to they executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only), each with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Jammalamadugu. I. ii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. IV. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and V. 6 shall make themselves available for Interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. Vi. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. vii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall passports, if any, to the investigating officer. If they claim they do not have that effect to the Investigating Officer. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. surrender their that a passport, they shall submit an affidavits to 10. SD/- iw.prabhakara ASSiSTAf^BGjSYRAR SEdtlON OFFICER RAO //TRUE COPY// F To, 1. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jammalamadugu 2. The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Jammalamadugu 3. The SHO, Muddanur Police Station, MuddaniTr, YSR Kadapa 4. One CC to Sri K Srinivas, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCS to Public Prosecutor!ldigh Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. One spare copy District HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED: 07/10/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.10181 of 2025 ALLOWED