APHC010080462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1751/2025 Between: S. Khaja Peer ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED A N D The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 O R D E R:- This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘the BNSS’) has been filed on behalf of the petitioner herein/accused No.4 to grant anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.29 of 2025 of Punganur Urban Police Station, Chittoor, Chittoor District. 2. A case has been registered against the petitioner herein/accused No.4 and other accused for the offences punishable under Sections 316 (5), 318 (4), 336 (3), 61 (2) (a) read with Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘BNS’). 3. Brief facts of the case of prosecution are that, the informant viz. B.Kishore Kumar was working as Regional Business Head in Kanaka Durga Finance Limited, Autonagar, Vijayawada, which is registered under the Companies Act, 1956; that on 23.01.2025 the informant presented report to Punganur Police alleging that accused Nos.1 to 6, being the personnel of Kanaka Durga Finance Limited, were alleged to have conspired together and created fake gold loan applications in the name of several customers by forging their signatures and fabricated the documents and pledged spurious gold ornaments and obtained 3 gold loan to a tune of Rs.2,84,33,807/- and caused loss to the Finance Company. Basing on the report of the informant, a case in Crime No.29 of 2025 was registered for the aforesaid offences and investigated into. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner herein/accused No.4 would contend that the accused No.4 is nothing to do with the case and he is innocent of the affairs occurred in the subject Finance company and that, the petitioner herein/accused No.4 is falsely implicated into the crime with a view to cause pressure on him and to bring him to the terms of the informant. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State would contend that the petitioner herein/accused No.4 worked as Branch Manager in Kanaka Durga Finance Limited and the investigation disclosed that during the process of reappraising the gold ornaments, it is noticed that 168 gold ornaments, which were pledged at the time of availing gold loan, are found to be spurious ornaments, and such spurious ornaments were pledged by the accused, who happened to be personnel of the said Finance Company, and they were alleged to have conspired together, forged and fabricated the signatures and documents of several 4 customers. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would further contend that the petitioner herein/accused No.4, being the Branch Manager of the said Finance Company, actively conspired with other accused and his role in the crime would come into light only after completion of entire investigation and if he is granted anticipatory bail at this stage, it would cause hindrance to the investigation. Hence, prays to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 6. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 7. A perusal of material on record goes to show that the petitioner herein/accused No.4 and other accused in the subject crime are none other than the personnel of Kanaka Durga Finance Company Limited. The material on record further goes to show that during the Audit conducted on 16.12.2024 to 22.12.2024, the subject crime came into light and the preliminary report of the audit conducted by the personnel concerned, pointed the finger towards the accused, who are personnel of said Finance Company, among which, the petitioner herein/accused No.4 happened to be the Branch Manager. In total, the aforesaid Financial Company sustained loss to a sum of Rs.2,84,33,807/- due to the alleged dishonest and fraudulent act of the accused. The petitioner herein/ 5 accused No.4 being the Branch Manager of the said Financial Company, might be aware of all the transactions that occurred in his branch and the alleged role played by him in the subject crime is yet to be uncovered, during the course of investigation. If, at this stage, the petitioner herein/accused No.4 is granted anticipatory bail, it would cause hurdle to the investigation. Therefore, in the view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner herein/accused No.4. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition, shall stand closed. _______________________ __ JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY 25th February, 2025. DNB