APHC010507682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 648 OF 2025 Appeal under Section 14-A (2) of SC ST Act, against the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.422 of 2025 in Crime No. 368 of 2025 on the file of the Court of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge Tirupati, dated 17.09.2025. Between: Eragam Anil Kumar Reddy, S/o E.Siva Reddy, Aged about 30 years, Occ: Bike Rental Business, R/o D.No. 19-4-333, STV Nagar, Tirupati Town, Tirupati District, Andhra Pradesh. ...Appellant / Accused No.2 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravati. ...Respondent 2. Neelam Bhaskar, S/o N. Chengal Rayulu, aged about 52 years, R/oMoravaripalli Village, Pulicherla Mandal, Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh. ...Defacto Complainant -r Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI N.V.SUMANTH I Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following JUDGMENT : APHC010507682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 648/2025 [3368] Between: 1 FRAGAM ANIL KUMAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS. OCC BIKE RENTAL BUSINESS R/0 D.NO. 19-4-333. STV NAGAR. TIRUPATI TOWN, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. SIVA REDDY, S/0 E. ...apellant AND 1 THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATl. 2 NEELAM BHASKAR, S/0 N. CHENGAL RAYULUAGED about 52 YEARS. OCC NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER.R/OMORAVARIPALLI PULICHERLA MANUAL,CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPODENT{S): Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High Court may impugned order passed 368 of 2025 on the file be pleased to pleased to set- aside the in Crl.M.P.No.422 of 2025 in Crime No. of the Court of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge Tirupati, dated 17.09.2025and order release of the appellant/accused.no.2 by granting bail in the Interest of justice and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the filing of the certified copy of the impugned CrI.M.P.No-422 of 2025 in Crime No. 368 of 2025 on the file of order passed in the Court of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge Tirupati, dated 17.09.2025 and pass Counsel for the Appellant; 1.M/S INDUS LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR c HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL APPEAL No: 648 OF 2025 THE The Court made the following Judgment: Heard Sri N.V.Sumanth learned learned counsel for the Prosecutor Additional Public appellant/A2 and representing the State. The present Appeal is filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of 2. Scheduled Castes and the Atrocities) Act, 1989, challenging the Order dated 17.09.2025, in the file of the learned IV Additional Crl.M.P.No.422 of 2025 on District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati. Sri N.V.Sumanth, learned counsel for the appellant/A2 shown as A2 in the above 3. would submit that the appellant was case who got arrested on 07.08.2025 and since then, he was in would further submit that even as per the of the investigation has been completed but erroneously dismissed the bail application on the judicial custody. He case record, most the trial Court I ground that earlier, he was involved in some would submit that those offences are and they will not come in the way his application to enlarge him on other offences. He not similar to the present of the Court to consider bail. He would further submit case 4 ■^3 that subsequent to the impugned order, this Court enlarged A1 and some other accused in the said case circumstances, the appeal may be allowed and the Appellant/A2 may be released on bail. on bail. In those 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor State opposed the present Appeal contending that the order of the learned trial Court, the Appellant six (06) other cases earlier and it is not a fit case to release the appellant on bail, at the stage of investigation accused are yet to be arrested. representing the even as per was involved in , as some of the 5. Admittedly, appiellant/A2 was arrested on 07.08.2025 and since then he was in judicial custody. The order of the would disclose that material part of the investigation has been completed, as on the date. There is no dispute about the fact that subsequent to the impugned Order, trial Court released other accused on bail who trial Court A1 and were arrested in this case. The only ground raised against the Appellant/A2 is that he was involved in six (06) other cases earlier, and therefore there is every likelihood of appellant committing similar offence if he be released on bail, pending the investigation. 5 f 6. The present case relates to offences punishable under Section 109 BNS equivalent to Section 307 IPC. Earlier offences does not relate to any such offence or other grave offence. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the order dated 17.09.2025, in Crl.M.P.No.422 of 2025 on the file of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati, is hereby set aside. The appellant/A2 shall be released on bail, subject to the following terms and conditions: i) The appellant/A2 shall be enlarged on bail, on executing a personal bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two (02) sureties for a like sum each, to the satisfaction of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati. ii) On release, the appellant/A2 shall appear before the concerned Station House Officer, on every fourth Saturday of the* month, for 3 period of three (03) months or till the date of filing of charge sheet, whichever is earlier. iii) The appellant/A2 shall not leave the country without permission of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati. 6 iv) The appellant/A2 shall not involve in any similar offence in future in any manner. v) The appellant/A2 shall not intimidate the victim or her family members in this case in any manner. vi) The appellant/A2 shall cooperate with the investigation whenever necessary on the notice issued by the concerned Station House Officer. vii) If the appellant/A2 violates any of the above conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to file an application seeking cancellation of the bail. viii) On such filing of application by the prosecution, the learned trial Court is at liberty to pass necessary orders for cancellation of bail order granted by this Court. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed. 8. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. SDI- E.KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The IV Additional District and Sessions Judge Tirupati, Chittoor District (with records if any ) 2. The II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,Tirupati , Chittoor District (with records if any ) 3. The Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Srikalahasthi, Tirupati District (erstwhile Chittoor District) 4. The Station House Officer, Tirupathi East Police station,Tirupathi District (erstwhile Chittoor District) 5. One CC to Sri N.V. Sumanth, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi [OUT} 7. The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati 8. Two CD Copies MV TAC HIGH COURT DATED: 09/10/2025 JUDGMENT CRLA No. 648 OF 2025 I 1 (I OCT 2025 ^ * Current Section m ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL APPEAL