lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE I :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 6013, 6103, 6551, 6616 and 7977 OF 2025 CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6013 OF 2025 Between : 1. Akula Ramadevi, W/o. A.-MaIIikharjuna Aged about 50 years, Occ Agriculture R/o. D.No. 3-4-23, Puttaparthy Road, Pasuvula FIospital, Kothacheruvu, Anantapu`r DistrI-Ct. (A4) 2. Sammiti Yugandhar, C/a. -"Sammiti Chennakesavulu Aged about 32 years; occ Agriculture, R/d. -D.No. 2-273-1, Kothacheruvu, Anantapur District. (A6) 3. Akkula Chandrayudu; S/o.' Akkula Narayanappa, Aged about 43 years3 occ Agriculture R/o: 'D.No. S-203, BC Colony, Kothacheruvu, Anantapur District. `(A7) I 4. N. Vishnu Vardhan, S/o. Narayana, Aged about 24 years, Occ Agriculture R/o. D.No. 3/350, Kothacheruvu, Anantapur District. (A9) 5. Allakun{a Srl-nivasulu @ Seenappa, s/o. Allakunta Naganna, Aged about 41 years, Occ AgrI-Cultur6, R/o. D.No. S-447, BC Colony, Kothacheruvu, AnantapLr Di;trict. (A12) 6. M. Narayana, S/o. M.I Aanjaneyulu, Aged about 56 years, Occ' Agriculture R/o. D.No. 4-10, -Peddamma Gudi Veedj, Kothacheruvu, Anantapur District. (A13)''| 7. Panasabotia Ganesh, S/6. Babu, Aged about 21 years, Occ Agriculture R/o. D.No. S-429', Puttaphartj Road Kothacheruvu, Anantapur District. (A14) 8. S Dubba chandra @ Mallrchandra, s/o. Malll Sreeramulu, Aged about 38 years, R/o. D.No. 3-222, Gandhi Nagar, Kothacheruvu, Anantapur Di-strI'Ct. (A15) 9. Gutl'uru praveen, s/o G. -Sanjl-varayudu, Aged about 29 years, occ Aryrl-^l,I+.',__ r`, _+-_-: --1-596, DMM Road, Kothacheruvu, Anantapur Agrl-culture R/o. D.--N6. DI-Strl'ct. (A17) 10. Lakke sI'Va @ Siva, s/o. L. Ramu, Aged about 22 years, oc6 Agriculture R/o. D No. 3-446, lsukuvanka veedhI-, Kothacheruvu, Anantapur District. (A18) ii. .fu,4-araala Ganesh @ Dampe{ja Ganesh, s/o. D. Obulesu, Aged aboul{ 22 years, occ Agncujture R/a D.No. 1- 420, SC ColJorj`y', 12 KothacMhael:euDV:;,i:aangtaarpa:ul D:str:catai£2IhOyl)agara_Ju, S/o sakee AnJ"larnPa, Aged about 50 yearsa, o`cc Agncu!tulre, R/o D.No. 2- 42, Myla PajiI|J1, 13 Tlruma:aa::vyaa:harpaa ":aKnoktahrac:erpuavluaJmAanaasltasDaunrkDalr:tr:c;o (Ai24:oth ulalah JI Aged about 43 years, occ Agr!cull{Lire R/a. D.No. 5/816, BC CollOnV- Kothacheruvu, Anantapur Distr,'ct (A 29) ...petitioners/Accused No.4,6,7,9,12,13, I... AND l': 14,15,.17,18,20,24 & 29{ I,he s{a{e of Andhra praalesfi, rep by Its publIC Prosecutor, High court o Andhra pradesh at Amarav-atj-.--- __ ..._ `,II[IH,lcll relltI( r:ho=u=±=+=^yh bL=_PI_eas_e_I to grant AntlcI Patory -B;II :a:;: I ::tlltI:ne:trI: the statIOn H'ouse officer, Kothacheruvu urban poII'Ce Statlon srI' Djs{rlct to release the petltlOners/Accused Mos 4, 6, 7, 9,12,13, '''''|--- ...Respondent/complainant' IDet!tion ullder sectlon 482 of Bharatjya Nagan'k- suraksha sanhlta, 2023 (438 of crp.c,`, praylngJ that jn the circumstances stated Jn the`` memorandum of grounds filed lnL support of the crlmlnal Petltjon, the Hlgh Court may be nlf±aeari +A nr__1:A by djrectjng'' Sathya saj+i 141 15117,~. 18, 20, 24 and 29 on bail jn the event of their arrest in connection with crime No. 42 of 2025 on the.Fil-e of'`'the Kothacheruvu Urban Police Station Sr,i Sathya Sai District. `L CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6103 OF 2.025 .Between : Morimisetty Jagadees`h R9y9,,I,I S{o M.Suresh, D.No.1-1g5, Dharmavarain -Road, Kothacheruvu, Anantapur District.(A3) AND ...Petitioner/Accuse-d The State of Andhra`PradeSh,:-rep by I'tS Public Prosecuto+, High Court of Andhra pradesh at Amaravati. .I.Respondent/Comp[ainan€ Petition under Section. 4§2..I.of` Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita', ~2023 (438 of Cr.P.C), 4br9yihg,-that in the Circumstances Stated in the inemorandum of grounds lfiled in support of the crI'minal Petition, the High ¢ourf may be pleased` to gfa-ri't-A`riticipatory Bail to the petitioner by directingi the station House Offi;6r|,I-kothacheruvu urban police Station, Sri Sathya Sai District to release the peti{ioher/ACcused No.. 3 on bail in the event of hl's{tl arrest in connection with' crime No. 42 of 2025 on the File of theJ kothacheruvu urban policel`Station, Sri Sathya Sai DI'StriCt. ;c'-``- CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6551' '6.-F'.-2025. Between : Neeruganti suresh @ chennutu sulresh, s/a. Nagaraju, Aged about 28 years,`t' A/o. I).No. 1-600 a, Dharmaivaram Road, VTC . Kothacheruvu, Anantapur:;I District. (A26) I' • AND it ... Petitionel'/Accusecl: I The state of Andhra prad`esh, rep by its publlc Prosecutor, High Court of I \J Andhra pradesh at Amaravatj.I t}-I.tit. ::2 023 .I,,f .mem •rl .` -t' court may be pleased to grant Antjcipatory Ba" to the petltioners by dlreCting _ _--I_''| `.'`, I |lgI.I the station House offlcer, Kothacheruvu urban police station sri sathya sai .lDjstrict to release the petitioners/Accursed No. A26 on ba" in the event of theI+ ...Respondent/complainant petitI'On under SectI-6n' 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik sLlraksha Sanhl'ta, (438 of cr.p.c), prey,i,hg' that jn the circumstances stated in th; orandum of grounds iI'led ln support of the criminal petltion, the Hlgh I __.. I _ ~-arrest i-n connection with crime No. 42 oT-2025 on the FI'le of `Kothacheruvu urban poi,-ce statI'On Srj Sathya sat- D,is±rict3 I .CRl MjNAL .Betweej1 : .Morimisetty Mahalakshm_i @, inaha Lakshmi, w/o M.Suresh, Aged 40 Ye R/a D.No.1-195, Dharmavaramr Road, Kothacheruvu, Ananthapuram, Sathya sa!' Dist.ric{. AND :a C -`= i-`{,ds?-J\_`a-5--l~-;`- ...Petitioner/Accused No.2l The state of Andhra pradesh, rep by its public Prosecutor, Hlgh court of Andhra pradesh at Amaraiva{.i -.I I N .C3 `.,--in.I,:....).-.N, ___,_..,_`,`, `Jlul`=u Hl l'lt= inemorandL'm of grounc!s filed`fh -support orr the crI'mjnaI Petjtlon, the HIgn, eouli ma'.y be pieasecI' tO §lrant Antlcipatory Baill to the petltiOner by directina the station House offlcelr, Ko{hacheruvu urban pollce StatIOn, Srl Sathya sal- DjstrICt to release the petltIOners/Accused No 2 on ba" in the event of thelr- arrest ln connectlon wlth crime No.42 of 2O25 on the f,le of the Kothacheruvu ljrban police statI'On Srj Sathya sat Djstrl'ct. i.-..:i=3\l-..I.i.-I., ...Respondent/complajmant petltIOn ulnder Sec-lion `482 oTr Bharatlya Nagarlk Suraksha sanhjta, 3 (438 of cr.pc), praying that ln the circumstances stated Ion the lbRIMBNAL PETITION.NO:-7977-OF 2025 I-`betwee n : _I+ .. :-A I?;.i kula Ganeswar Kumar`,.+ S/6`:.: '`'A'.+VIallikharjuna Aged abou`t 2-8 years, Oc6 I:'Doctor, R/o. D.No. 3-423, -Puttaparthy Road, Pasuvula Hospital, I -`.... ) =\l I tkothacheruvu, Anathapura'm' `bistriCJt. ... Petitioner/Accusecl AND The state of Andhra Pradtesh, rep by its public prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati a -::._.a?,.a(.,,,:_..-...E*_.-.-.r.$3.,i_,..,-=.. -A:..Respondent/Complainant petition under se;tidri»``-:4-82'-of-Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 023 (438 of Cr.P.C), pray,ing. that in the ci.rcumstances stated in th6 E=a IE UI ® EaICO grouhds ,fiI'ad in' ;upport of the criminal Petition, the High.I if ourt may be pleased to `-.grant Antic'ipatory Bail to .the petitioner by directing _.__ .i+-.--. e station House Officer,-Kothach-eruvu Urban Police Station, Sri Sa{hya Sa,; District to release the` petitioner/Ac6usedJNo.19 on bail in the event of his arrest in co.nnectI'On With'' 'Crinie No. 42 of 2025 on the File of the. Kothacheruvu urban police stati6`h, sri sathya sai District. i I.,.-.``i`,}',.`ll.I-...:~.``.-;'I:!`.'`-:r-.I,-lg,I-+'y:- Counsel for the Peti'tioners :.sri p.veera Reddy, (in all the above p6tEi-i-g'riS)- Senior Counsel, representing Srj Ramakrishna Akura{hi Counsel for the Respchdeht :Mr.Neelotpal Ganji, Assistant Public Prosecutor (ire all the above p6titio'ris)I The e®urr{ made the f®"®'wiiing£ THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMI NAL COMMON PETITION Mos: ORDER.. 6616 and 7977 of 2025 I These five criminal petitions, which were taken up fora hear!'ng analogously, are being disposed of by thI|S COmmOn Order aS they ar!'se out of I the same crime. I 2. Criminal Petitions have been filed under sectl-on 482 of the BharatI'ya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231 by the pe|litioners/Accused for grantillg of P.re-arrest bail in connection with crime No.42 cjf 2025 of Kothacheruvu u'rban Police S{atioil, Sri Sathy-a Sai Djstr,;ct, regJ;StereG' for the aiI!egea' OffenCeS Punishable under Sections 117(1),191(1),118(1),109(1), 74, 326(1), 329\J3) I read with 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20'232. a_A_SE OF THE I PROSECUT!ON: I 3. The case of the prosecution is th¢at on o7.06.2025 a{ about 1:30 p.m., at in a house site plot, measuring 7.65 cents in sy.No.446; Kothacheruvu Village I and MandaI, the accused uniawfuliy assembiea' armed with sticks by committing criminal trespass, and attacked the complainant, her son sagar Redd`y', and labourers engaged in cleaning alid fer,cing the site. Accursed N-os.i and 2, along with the.ir foiiowers came in two vehicies, a.ssauiteal sagar Reddy with intent to kill, icau.sed him severe injuries. ln that melee, one 1 Muthyiamma, who accompanied the comp!ainant, was beaten, throvyn down, and insulted. Five others from the complainant's side also sustaI-ned injuries 1 The BNSS 2TheBNS _Gin. \ <FS,.- - \ . I I 2 I Dr.YLR, J. crl.p.No's.6013, 6103, 6551, 6616, 7977 of`2025 Dated 08.10.2025 and the accused threatened them wI-th dire consequences. 'A Vehicle belo'nging. to the complainant was also damaged while committing the offences. I CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER.I 4. , Sri P. Veera Recldy, the learned senior counsel, appearing for sri Akurathi Rama Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitI'One`rS have been falsely I'mPliCated I'n the inStan't CaSe' and asserts that no I offences, as alleged in the report lodged by the de-facto complairrant, have been committed by the petitioners. lt is contended that the petitioners are the sole breadwinners of their families, and any coercive action, including arrest, would result in grave and irreparable hardship to their dependent family il members. lt is further submitted that the petI'tiOnerS are a law-abiding Citizen with a permanent place of residence and are willing to comply with any condition that this Court may deem fI-I and Proper for the grant Of antiCiPatOry I bail. The Petitioners undertake to cooperate fully with the ongoing investigation I and assure the court of their continued presence as and when reqLIired. I 5. Sri P.,Veera 'Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners also submits that there is no recovery attributable to the petitioners and that custodial interrogation is neither necessary nor justified in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The Petitioners have already extended full o* cooperation to the Investigating Officer ancl there exists no reasonable apprehemsion of their absconding opt {amPerjng with the Prosecution evidence. I _t p_RE`±YfS±fZavRTav 3 nrVIP i v|.|~\\I i CrI.P.Nos.6013, 6103, 6551, 6616, 7977 of 2025 Dated 08.10.2025 6. -Sri P. Veera Reddy, the learned Senior C.ounsel, further submits that a counter case was lodged by one of the accused in the instant crime, which was registered as FIR No.43 of 2025 of Kothach;ruvu Urban Police Station. ln 4 that case, the complainant succumbed to inJiurieS While undergoing treatment in the hospital. Ironically, the police have not altered the section of law sot far. It I `._~__. is further submitted that Thirumala ReddigarI' Suseela, the de-facto complainant, is the vendor of the disputed property, and that Morimiseety Mahalakshmi is the purchaser of the said property under a sale deed dated ll.01.2024. The de-facto coms,!ainant anc! ac_c_!JSeC! Ncl.2 hac!-ea!rjier e!n!t.'e.reci into an agreement of sale for a consideration of Rs.5O,00,000/-, under which the de-facto complainant received Fas.30,00,000/- on the date of the agreement .and the balance of Rs.20,00!OOO/- was agreed to be paid by I accusec,I N'o.2 within one and hail years, i.e., on or before 10.06.2025. The de- facto'complainant, in turn, undertook to execute and register the sale deed in favour of accused No.2. It is further submitted that possession of the disputeci property was also delivered pur6uant`tO the Said agreement Of Sale.. The learned senior counsel contends that, under the guise of the aforesaid agreement of sale, the dispute is purely of a civil nature, but the de-facto complain`aht has given it the colour of a criminal case and it is prayed t`o grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/Accusec!, in the interest of justice anc! equity. lt +/+ ++ Dr.YLR, J.® CrI.P.Mos.6013, 6103, 6551, 6616, 7977 of 2025 Dated 08.10.2025 PROSECUTOR: ARGUMENTS OFTHE ASSISTANT PUBLIC 6. Per contra, Mr. Neelotpal Ganji, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has strenuously opposed the prayer for grant oflanticipatory bail, asserting that the investigation is at a. nascent and sensitive stage, and that custodial interrogation of the Petitioners'is indispensable. for unearthing materl'al facts I germane to the offence. lt is submitted that enlargement of the petitioners on I Pre-arrest bail at this juncture would se.riously impede the investigative Process, aS there exists a grave apprehension that the petitioners may not extend requisj{e cooperation and may attempt to evade the due process of law. 7. Mr. Neelotpal Ganji, learned Assistant Public Prosecutorfrirther submits that the Petitioners, if granted the relief sought, may exert undue influence upon material witnesses or tamper with jncriminatl-ng evidence, thereby vi{ieting the integrity of the investigation and obstructing the course ofJ-uStiCe. lt is further submitted that 28 accused persons brutally attacked nine individuals. I I The accused, wielding dangerous weapons, not only caused hurt and,grievous hurt but also attempted to take away the lives of the victims and tried to extort immovable property. Even if a cI-Vil dispute Was Pending between the Parties, the 9CCuSed Were not Supposed tO take the law into their own hands, yet they inflicted severe injuries. Accused Nos.1 and 2 are brothers, and there are nearly 60 cases pending against them. They are habitual offenders. As regard-s .A,ceused No.30, there are specific overt acts attributed to him. ln total, --+f-3**g-,---3 T / ``itltiri`£ - 5 'r`rvIR I `<| .|`-|`| .. CrI.P.Nos.6O13, 61O3, 6551, 6616, 7977 of 2025 Dated 08.10.2025 I.here are nine victims in the case. L.Ws.3 and 4 suffered grievous iniuries, whiiet the other seven witnesses sustained simple injuries. The brullal attack committed by the petitioners and other accused was video-graphed by L.W.10. Considering the gravity of the allegations and the potential prejudI'Ce tot a,fair and impartial inquiry, it is prayed that the instant application be dismissed in the interest of justice and to safeguard the sanctity of th.e investigative I Process. 8. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the !earrEeu+ CoLiilSe! fC-I both SiCieS. i ha`v-e PeruSeC! the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 9. I ln the light of the case 'of the prosecutioh and the contentions of the !eamec! a,ounsel for both the sides, now the Point for consideration iS: :"Whetherthe Petitioners are entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?" -, ANALYSIS: 10. As seen from the record, an agreement of sale dated ll.01.2025 was I purportedly entered into between the de-facto comp'ainan{, T. Suseela, as vendor, and accused No.2,` M. Mahalakshmi, as vendee. An amount of Rs.30,.00,000/- was allegedly paid by accused No.2 to the cie-facto complainant, and the balance of Rs.20,001000/-was agreed to be paid on or before 10.06.2025. However, ih the report loclged by the cle-facto complainant on o7.06.2025, she contends that about five years ago she had air6ady paid the total sale ccmsic!eration in respect of Ac.7.65 cents of land im Sy.No®446 ? l-+i"`-I I t\ Dr.YLR, i CrI.P.Nos.6013, 6103, 6551, 6616, 7977 of 2025 Dated 08.10.2025 and had obtained a registered document from a`ccused No.2. I.I is lfurther stated that on 07.06.2025, when the de-facto complainant went to the said land along with her son, sagar Reddy, and certain labourers for the purpose of erecting fencI|ng, the petitioners and oth'er accused, armed with deadly weapons, trespassed I'ntO the land wI'th an intention to kill the son of the de- facto,complainant. ln the course of the I'nCident, accused No.1 allegedly cau;ed ,grl'evous injuries. A woman by name Muthy,a'amma, who had accompanied the de-facto complainant, was also brutally beaten, pushed to the ground, trampled upon, and sustained severe bleeding injuries. other Persons Present also received injuries. The report of the de-facto complainant wast registered as a case in FIR No.42 of 2O25. ll. lt I-S alleged by the prosecution, and also as seen from the record that I L.W.1 Thirumala Reddl-gari Suseela, L.W.2 Thirumala Reddigari Hema Sagar, L.W.5 A{uri Balakrishna, L.W.6 Yelagonda Kasi Viswanath, L.W.7 Gujjala Vehkata Ramanamma, L.W.8 Mannila Syamala and L.W.9 -Sake Muthyalamma suffered simple injuries. L.W.3 Yeruka Muthyalamma and L.W.4 Nandam Balakrishna suffered grievous injuries.. h 12. As seen from the statements of L.Ws.1 to 15, L.Ws.1 to 9 wereseverely beaten by the accused with dangerous weapons. L.Ws.10 and ll 'rec6rded a vide`o of the entire alleged I-nCident using their mobile phones. It is noted that t.here a're specific overt acts attributed to Accused Mos.1, 5 to 9,12 to 16,18, 209 21, 23, 25j and 29. The_,refore, the request for grant of pre-arrest bail for the : ...I .`< eREiFf55E¥anseey T- £gs§.. Dr.YLR, J cri.p.N-os.6013, 6103, 6551, 6616, 7977 of 2025 Dated O8.10.2025 aforementioned accused is neither convincing .nor reasonable. Hence, their I request for 'pre-arrest bail is rejected. Accused Mos.10,ll, 22, 27 & 28 have not approached this Court for grant of pre-arrest bail. I 13. Cons-lderincl the facts and circumstance's, the gravity and nature Of the allegations levelled the Petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail I to the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 4,17,19, 24, 26 inasmuch as there'were no specific`o\,Jeri acts reported against. them. The request for grant of pre- arrest bail for Accused Mos.1, 5 to 9,12 to 16,18, 20, 21, 23, 25, and 29 is rejec{ec! as i.here a.re specific o\v'ert acts reported against t`hem. CONCLUSION: I 14. ln the result,, the Criminal Petition No.6013 of 2025 is partly` allowed, criminal petition Mos.6103, 6551, 6616 and 7977 of 2025 are allowed with the I foiiowing stringent corlditiorls: i. ln the event of arrest of the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 4,17, 19, 24, and 26, they shall be enlarged on bail subject ilo they executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand. only), with two sureties for the like Sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; ii. The Petitioners/Accu'sed Mos.2 i:o 4, 17,19, 24, and 26 shall make themselves available for investigation aS and When required; i ++ iI'I'. IV. V- VI. 8 Dr.YLR, .J crI.P.Nos.6013, 6103, 6551, 6616, 7977 of 2025 Dated o8.10.2025 The petjtjoners/Accused Mos. 2 to 4,17,19, 24, and 26 sha" not cause any threat, ,-nducement or promise to the prosecu{jon witnesses,I The Petf'tjoners/Accused Nos.2 {o 4, 17, 19, 24, and 26 sha" appear before the station House officer concerned once in a week i.e., on every saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.OO p.m., I tl-ll f,-ling of the charge sheet. The Petl-{ioners/Accused Mos.2 to 4,17,19, 24, and 26 sha" not leave the state of Andhra pradesh ll-ml-ts wl-thout the express perml-ssjon from the station House officer concerned. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 4, 17, 19, 24, and 26 she" surrender their passport, jf any, to the jnvestjgating officer. lf they claim that they do not have passport, they shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the lnvestjgatl-ng officer / SD/- B.PRASAD RAO llTE`UE COPYll I DEPUTY sE~cTION OFFICER To, 1. The Station House Officer, Kothacheruvu urban police slat,-on, srI- Sathya Sai District. 2. One CC to Sri Ramakrishna Akura{hi, Advocate [opuc] 3. Two CCs Public Prosecutor, A.P. High Court, Amaravati [ouT] 4. Ome spare copy CVSS `|\ I+ HIGH COURT Dr.YLR,J DATED:08/10/2025 B_A_!± O.R_DEF3` CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 6013, 6103, 6551, 6616 and 7977 OF 2025 CrlP. No.6013 is paFtiy ajjOWed9 CrIP. Mos.6103, 6551, 6616 anc! 7977 of 2025 are aiio-weci 1 8 B€T 7fl7F +iT*T a_. I ±_I fJi*j;® +/;a/