[3327] I+ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY ITHE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY - TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1017 OF2025 , Between : Gandhi Azad Babu, son of Chinna Rao, aged about 21 years, R/o D.No. 13_7_16/17, Near Ammoru Temple, Dandu Bazar, Maharipeta, Visakahpaatnam. Petitioner/Accused No.3 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its public prosecutor, High Court of AP, Amaravathi, Guntur District through station House Officer, II Town Police, Station, Visakhapatnam Respondent/Complainant Petitl-on under Section 480 & 483 of Cr.P.C js filed prayl'ng that in the cl'rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the criml'nal petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the regular bail application as disml'ssed in CRL.MP.No.22 of 2025 on the file of vlI Additl'onaI Dl'strict and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam dated 17.01.2025 in connection with in Crime No.313 of 2024 of ll Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam by enlarging regular bail to the petitioner/Accused in Crime No.313 of 2024 of ll Town Police station, Visakhapatnam. , The petl'tion/Appeal coml-ng on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V SURENDRA REDDY Advocate for the petitioner, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) for the Respondent and the court made the following. APHCO10048042025 lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1017 OF 2025 Between : Gandhi Azad Babu ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.VSURENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharat'lya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner/Accused, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.313 of 2024 of ll Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate. == +I`.`t> r 2. A case has been registered a.gainst the petitioner herein for the offence punishable under section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short lBNS'). 3, Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, since April, 2021 the de facfo complainant has got acquaintance with the accused through instagram, and from then onwards, they used to speak lover phone. lt is alleged that on the pretext of marrying the de facfo complainant, for the last eight (8) months, the accused used to take her to Anu Grand Lodge, bes,'de Bombay Restaurant, captal'n Rama Rao junction, visakhapatnam cl-ty and sexually exploited her. The accused also took Rs.2,80,000/- towards debt from her and now the accused refused to marry her and not returning the said amount. 4. Learned counsel for the petitl'oner submitted that when there l's a physical relationship between the de facfo complainant and the petitl'oner herein for a prolonged period, there is no question of criminality that can be attached to such prolonged PhySI'Cal relationship at a very belated stage. In support of his contention, he relied upon a decisI-On in Mahesh Damu Khare v. ` -`_. > Z, ( + / the State of Maharashtra, (Criminal Appeal No.......of 2024 @ Special Leave Petition (CrI.) No.4326 of 2018, dated 26.ll.2024), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows. ll31. ln our view if criminality is to be attached to such prolonged physical relationship at a very belated stage, it can lead to serious consequences. lt will open the scope for imputing criminality to such long term relationships after turning sour, as such an allegation can be made even at a belated stage to drag a person in the juggernaut of stringent criminal process. There is always a danger of attributing criminal intent to an otherv'lse disturbed civil relationship of which the Court must also be mindful. 32. lt is evident from the large number of cases decided by this Court dealing with similar matters as discussed above that there is a worrying trend that consensual relationships going on for prolonged period, upon turn'Ing SOur, have been sought to be criminalized by invoking criminal jurisprudence." 5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has distinguished the aforesaid decision on the ground that the said decision which has been relied upon, by the learned |` i= --. _I----L 4 J, counsel for the petjtI'Oner is in connectl'on with the offence under section 376 IPC, whereas the present case is under section 69 of the BNS. According to him, the allegation I'S that on the pretext of marryI'ng the de facfo complal'nant, the petitioner had physI-Gal relatI'OnShiP WI-th her and later he refused to marry her. 6. Heard. perusedtherecord. 7. A perusal of the material on record goes to show that for for the past three (3) years i.e. from Apr" 2021, both the petitioner herein and the de faofo complainant got acquaintance wl'th each other, and for the last eight (8) months they have been maintaining physical relationship. when the petjtjoner refused to marry the de facfo complainant, she has resorted f'n fill-ng the present complaI|nt in the year 2024 i.e. after lapse of three years. petjtjoner hereI'n Was arrested on 23.12.2024 and since then he Its jn judjcI'al remand. Learned Assl-slant publl'c prosecutor submI'tted that so far, as many as five wI|tneSSeS including the de facfo complal-nant, were examined and major porfl'on of investl'gation has been completed. ts€- _ 7==ac_ DnHE7 8. ln view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner/Accused on the fo[[owing conditions. i) The petitioner/Accused shall be released on bail on his executing, a personal bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned ll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. ii) On release, the petitioner shall appear before the Station House,Officer concerned, once in a week i.e., on every Saturday between 10.00 am and 01.00 pm, till filing of the charge sheet. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. //TRUE COPY// Fc SD/- v.SAVITHRI GOWRI ASSISTANTasISTRAR sE6TION OFFICER To, 1. The ll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Visakhapatnam. 2. The VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam. 3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Visakhapatnam. 4. The Station House Officer, lI Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam. 5. One CC to SRl. V SURENDRA REDDY Advocate [OPUC] ^6. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor (AP) High Court ofA.P., Amaravati [OUT]. 7. One spare copy A? HIGH COURT SRK,J DATE D.. 07/02/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.1017 of 2O25 ALLOWED a