1 APHC010686922025 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: 13204/2025 Between: T.MANIKANTA ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. S PARINEETA 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 Petitioner/Accused No.1 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with O.R. No.41 of 2025-26 of Forest Range Officer, Palamaner, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 303(2) read with 3(5), 49, 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘the BNS’) and Sections 20(1)(c) ii, iii, iv, x, 2 read with Sections 20(1)(d)(i) and 62 of A.P. Forest (Amendment) Act, 2016, Rule 3 of A.P. Sandal Wood and Red Sanders Wood Transit Rules, 1969. 2. Perused the record. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. The allegation against the petitioner/Accused No.1 is that he trespassed into the reserve forest along with the other accused and assisted them in cutting red sandalwood trees. It is further alleged that the accused cut two trees and converted them into two logs weighing about 61 kgs, having a total value of Rs.1,55,481/-. 4. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are two adverse criminal antecedents reported against the petitioner/Accused No.1: one is under the provisions of ‘the Forest Act’ and the other one is under the provisions of ‘the NDPS Act’. 5. On perusal of the record, there are specific overt acts attributed to the petitioner. In view of these circumstances, the petitioner/accused No.1 is 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 3 Singh Sibbia v. State of Panjab1and 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 petitioner/accused No.1, liberty is granted to the petitioner/accused No.1 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 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 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