lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE SEVE`NTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JLjSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10032 OF 2025 Between : Pokapudi Narayana, S/o. Srinivasulu,Aged about 40 years,R/o. B.S.Kandriga villageMuthukuru Mandal,SPSR NeIIore District .... Petitioner/Accused No.1 -.AND The Station House Officer, Muthukur Police Station,Rep. by its Public prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravathi .... Respondent petition under section 482 of:BNSS is filed, praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail in the event of his arrest in cr.No.175/2025 of Muthukur Police Station under Sections 126 (2), 308 (5),115 (2) r/w. 3 (5) BNS. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of c SUBODH Advocate for the Petitioner, Asst Public Prosecutor for the Respondent and the Court made the following. ORDER This cr.lminal Petition has been filed, under Section 482 of the Bharat-lya Nagarik Surak;ha Sanhita, 2023, by the Petit'lOner-accused No. 1 seeking for granting of pre-arrest bail to him in Crime No.175 of 2025 of Muttukur Police station, s.p.s.R. Nellore District, registered for the OffenCeS Punishable under sect-Ions 126 (2), 308 (5) and 115 (2) read w.lth Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. CASE OF THE 2. On 17-06-2025, de facto COmPlainant received author-lZed letter from Mahaveer Finance India Lim-lted, Chennai, tO recover tippers bearing registration Nos. AP 39 UN 0118 and AP 39~UNO119 from accused No.1. On 18-06-2025 at about 12 hours, near NCL Company, Genco Road, pidathapoluru village of Muthukur Mandal, while de faCtO COmPlainant Was seizing the tippers, accused No. 1 came to .the Place along With five Others, wrongfully restrained him, beat with hands and legs indiscriminately, extorted an amount of Rs.2,000/-from his pocket and threatened tO kill by Pressing his throat. CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE 3. Sri C.Subodh, learned COunSel for the Petitioner, Subm.Its that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged OffenCeS, without any cogent evidence linking to the comm'lssion of the crime. lt 'ls contended that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and his arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to the dependents of the 3 Petitioner. The petitioner undertakes to abide by any condition that {his` court may impose while granting pre-arrest bail to the pe{i{ioner. 4. lt is further submitted that the petitioner has permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of him absconding or evading the process of law. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant custodial interrogation, and if any condition is imposed while granting the pre- arrest bail, the petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petitI-On. ALRGUMENTS OF THE STATE:_ 5. Per confra, Ms. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, strenuously opposed the grant of pre-arrest bal'I, contending that the I-nvestigation is still underway and several material witnesses yet to be examined. lt is submitted that enlargement of the petitioner on pre-arrest bail at this stage would seriously hamper the progress of the investigation and may result in non-cooperation from the petitioner. The prosecution further apprehends that the petitioner, if released, may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby obstructing the course of justice. lt is also u®rged that there exists a real and imminent risk of the petitioner absconding and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the petitioner does not deserve the discretionary relief of pre-arrest bailand it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. '\ \ Thoughtful consideration iS bestowed On the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSI DERATION 7. ln the lightOfthe Case Of the Prosecution and the contentions Of learned counsel for both sides, now the po'lnt for considerat'lon is: "whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of pro-arrest bail?" 8. The allegation against the Petitioner-accused No. 1 is that he used criminal force against de faCtO COmPlainant Who Went tO the Petitioner for seizing of tw'o tippers which were purchased by the petitioner by taking loan from Mahaveer Finance India Limited, Chennai. lf the petitioner failed tO repay the loan.instalments or clear the loan amount, the finance company has got a right to approach competent civil court or any other Court for recovery of the amount or for attachment of movable or immovable property. De facto complainant also mentioned 'ln his report that he does not require any treatment. CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the facts and Circumstances Of the Case and the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the Petitioner-accused No.1, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to him with the following stringent conditions: -. ----` I: E ln the event of arrest, the petitioner-accused No. 1 sh`all be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of arresting officials; (if) The petitioner-accused No. 1 shall appear before the station House Officer concerned on every saturday in between 10:00 am and 05.loo bm till filing of charge sheet; (iI'i) The petitioner-accused No. 1 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future,I (iv) The petitI'Oner-accused No. 1 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investl-gation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogatl|on by the investigating officer as and when requ,'red,- (v) The petitioner-accused No.1 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; and (vi) .The petitioner-accused No. 1 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. lf he claims that he does not have a passport, he shall submit an affl'clavit to that effect to the Investigating officer. ..- sD/-U.SRI DEVl ASSISTANT TRAR 10. The criminal petI'tiOn iS accordingly allowed. //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER ToI 1. The Station House Officer, Muthukur Police Station, SPSR Nellore District. 2. One CC to SRl. C SUBODH Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court ofAndhra Pradesh [OUT] 4. One spare copy ksr HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED:07/10/2025 BAILORDER - CRLP.No.10032 of 2025 ALLOWED