1 APHC010700342025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13310/2025 Between: BANDI RAMANJULU ALIAS RAMANJANEYULU ALIAS BANTI AND OTHERS ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. SYED KHADER MASTAN Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 3 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.210 of 2025 of T.Sundupalli Police Station, Annamayya District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 126 (2), 324(4) 2 and 109 read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘the BNS’). 2. Perused the record. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. The allegation against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 is that they beat the defacto complainant indiscriminately with hands, legs and stones. It is further alleged that the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 damaged the car of the defacto complainant. 4. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are five adverse criminal antecedents reported against the petitioner No.1/Accused No.1. 5. On perusal of the record, there are specific overt acts attributed to the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3. In view of these circumstances, the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 are not entitled to the grant of pre-arrest bail, as it would amount to providing a shield or protection to a person against whom specific overt acts attributed. Grant of pre-arrest bail is not a license for the commission of cognizable and non-bailable offences, as per the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Panjab1 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 3 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of (NCT of Delhi)2. Hence, there are no merits in the petition. 6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, as per the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3, liberty is granted to the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned within one (01) week from the date of receipt of copy of this order, and move an appropriate application before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned. On such filing, the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned is directed to dispose of the said application in accordance with law, on its own merits by giving due and sufficient opportunity to both the learned counsels, and pass appropriate orders within a period of one week. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 30.12.2025 S D P 2(2020) 5 SCC 1 4 173 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13204 OF 2025 30.12.2025 S D P