APHC010095852025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2030/2025 Between: 1. LANKA RAJESWARI @ LANKA CHAMMAKKA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE. R/O. D. NO. 3-98, PEDDA TADEPALLI TADEPALLIGUDEM. EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. LANKA NAGA RAJU, S/O. SRI LANKA NAGESWARA RAO 45 AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS R/O. D. NO. 3-98, PEDDA TADEPALLI TADEPALLIGUDEM. EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P., AT AMARAVATI THROUGH THE SHO, III TOWN POLICE STATION RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. REMELLA HARISH, S/O. VENKATA SATYANARAYANARAO, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O.3-32, DORALU STREET, KADIYAM MANDAL, VEERAVARAM VILLAGE, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. RESPONDENT NO.2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE COURT ORDER DATED 08.05.2025 IN I.A.NO.2 OF 2025 IN CRL.P.NO.2030 OF 2025. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. M. NAGA RAGHU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. AKULA SRI KRISHNA SAI BHARGAV 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed on behalf of the Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 and 2 to grant anticipatory bail to them in 2 connection with Crime No.53 of 2025 of III Town Police Station, Rajamahendravaram for the offences under Sections 319(2), 318(4) and 308(2) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’). 2. Heard Sri M.Naga Raghu, learned counsel for the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2, Sri A.S.K.S.Bhargav, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for State. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the allegations leveled against the Petitioners are false and frivolous. Learned counsel would submit that, Respondent No.2 is an adulterer and from 2022 onwards he used to maintain illegal relations with one Baby Rani and her team of women and in that course, he used to come to contact with Petitioner / Accused No.1. It is submitted that, when the relation between Respondent No.2 and said Baby Rani was strained, he filed a false case against Baby Rani which was registered as Crime No.238 of 2024 of Kadiyam Police Station. When the Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 and 2 herein tried to prove that Respondent No.2 is a habituated male prostitute, by influencing the Police, Respondent No.2 implicated them in the present case with false allegations. Learned counsel would further submit that the Petitioners filed Crl.P.No.1562 of 2025 before this Court seeking quashment of the proceedings against them and a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide Order dated 13.02.2025 disposed of the said petition directing the Police to follow 3 the guidelines as envisaged in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar1 judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court, since the offences are punishable with imprisonment of below seven years. It is further submitted that Respondent No.2 having political influence, influencing the Police to get the Petitioners arrested. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would further submit that the Police, without considering the order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, are threatening the Petitioners to arrest. It is further submitted that the allegations leveled against the Petitioners are false and omnibus. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit the Petitioners undertake to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by the Hon’ble Court in the event of grant of anticipatory bail. 4. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2 and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, in unison, opposed the petition and would submit that the investigation is in progress. It is submitted that the investigation is at nascent stage, as such there is every possibility of tampering with the evidence in case, the Petitioners are granted anticipatory bail. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition. 5. As seen from the contents of the complaint, it is alleged that, Respondent No.2 used to have acquaintance with one Baby Rani, who is doing prostitution and she introduced Petitioner / Accused No.1, who is also in prostitution. It is further alleged that Respondent No.2 used to visit the house of Petitioner / Accused No.1. Subsequently, one Nandu Madhuri used 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273 4 to chat with Respondent No.2 and on one day, she sent a message demanding Rs.60,000/- and threatening to file false case against him. When the same was informed to Petitioner / Accused No.1, on the pretext of settling the issue, she along with her husband i.e., Petitioner / Accused No.2 extorted a total sum of Rs.1,02,00,000/- from him. 6. A bare perusal of the material placed on record would show that the Petitioners herein already filed Crl.P.No.1562 of 2025 seeking quashment of the proceedings against them in the present crime, and the same was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court at the admission stage directing the Police to complete the investigation and also to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of BNSS. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioners that the Police without considering the said Order, having been influenced by Respondent No.2, are threatening to arrest them. It is the further contention of the Petitioners that there was transfer of amounts from the PhonePe of Respondent No.2 to the Petitioners and also from the Petitioners to Respondent No.2 in the months of November and December, 2024, which are after the alleged extortion and they filed the statement of account of the Petitioner / Accused No.2. 7. Considering the submissions, this Court is of the view that the allegations leveled against the Petitioners are the factual aspects to be decided during investigation and it is not the stage to decide the culpability of the Petitioners by accepting the allegations. In such circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioners. 5 8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed granting anticipatory bail to the Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 and 2, on the following conditions: (i) The Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall appear before the concerned Magistrate Court, within one week from today and shall furnish personal bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) each with two sureties for the like sum each, to the satisfaction of concerned Magistrate Court; (ii) The Petitioners shall appear before the Station House Officer, concerned, once in a week i.e., on Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m. (iii) The Petitioners shall be available for investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer; (iv) The Petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him / her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any Investigating or Police Officer. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Dt.22.09.2025 Dinesh 6 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2030 of 2025 Dated:22.09.2025 Dinesh