APHC010543272025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: Between: 1. SHASIK SHANNU, S/O.LATE SHAIK ALI AGED 41 YEARS, R/O D.NO 26-16-135, 2ND LANE, AKULAVARITHOTA NEAR S.P.BUNGALOW, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by Public Prosecutor at High Court of AP, Amaravathi and Station House Officer, Nagarampalem Police Station Guntur District. Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. K L N SWAMY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order : The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioner/Accused for granting of 202 of 2025 of Nagarampalem IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10649 OF 2025 SHASIK SHANNU, S/O.LATE SHAIK ALI AGED 41 YEARS, R/O D.NO 135, 2ND LANE, AKULAVARITHOTA NEAR S.P.BUNGALOW, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by Public Prosecutor at High Court of AP, Amaravathi and Station House Officer, Nagarampalem Police Station Guntur District. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order : The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioner/Accused for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. Nagarampalem Rural Police Station, Guntur District, registered IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO SHASIK SHANNU, S/O.LATE SHAIK ALI AGED 41 YEARS, R/O D.NO 135, 2ND LANE, AKULAVARITHOTA NEAR S.P.BUNGALOW, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by Public Prosecutor at High Court of AP, Amaravathi and Station House Officer, ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the bail in connection with Crime No. Rural Police Station, Guntur District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 338, 340(2), 329(3) and 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. The allegation against the petitioner/sole accused is that he illegally occupied an open plot belonging to the defacto complainant, who is working as a Professor in the Department of Computer Science at NIT, Warangal. It is further alleged that the petitioner created a false document purporting to show that the vendor of the defacto complainant had sold the disputed property to the petitioner/sole accused by means of forgery. Upon enquiry, the defacto complainant came to know through one Ch.Radha Krishna, a document writer, that his signature had been forged by the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner/sole accused has filed a civil suit in O.S.No.530 of 2023 against the defacto complainant, which is presently pending before the competent Civil Court. It is contended that the defacto complainant has converted a civil dispute into a criminal proceeding. The counsel therefore prays that the petitioner be enlarged on pre-arrest bail, submitting that the petitioner has got fixed abode. He is permanent resident of Guntur District. 5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has two previous criminal antecedents vide Crime No.20 of 2018 registered for the alleged offence under Section 420 IPC; and Crime No.477 of 2022 registered under Sections 354, 323, and other relevant provisions. It is further submitted that the investigation in the present case is at a nascent stage. 6. Be that as it may, there are specific overt acts attributed against the Petitioner. Granting of the pre-arrest bail to an accused is not a shield or protection for having committed an offence as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Panjab1and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of Delhi2. 7. In view of the adverse antecedents against the Petitioner and his specific role played in this case, he is disentitled to get pre-arrest bail. Hence, this Court does not deem it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. 8. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 29.10.2025 KK 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 2(2020) 5 SCC 1