[3369] 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI +gr4gggffiREj MONDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2105 OF 2025 Between: 1. Bollada Janardan, S/o Panduranga Rao, age about 25 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o H.No.1-133, Karravarisavaram Village, Vundrajavaram MandaI, West Godavari District 2. Panduranga rao @ Paandu, s/o P.Satyanarayana, age about 51 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o H.No.1-133, Karravarisavaram Village, Vundrajavaram MandaI, West Godavari District. petitioners/Accused 1 & 2 AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi through PS Undrajavaram. Respondent/State Petition under Section 482 of BNSS (438 of Cr.P.C.,) praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioners On bail in the event of their arrest in connection with crime No.24 of 2025, of Undrajavaram Police Station, East Godavari District COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERj: SRl. K V L NARASIMHA RAO COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER APHCO10100062025 ,, lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (speciaf5rt#aR[AJVu?Tsldiction) [3369] MONDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH ll^/O THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO QBIMINAL PETITION NO: 2105/202JE Betwee n : Bollada Janardhan and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(s): 1.KV L NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER:I The Criminal Petition, u/See.482 of B.N.S.S is filed on behalf of the petitioners/Al and A2 to grant anticipatory bail in connection with crime No.24/2025 of Undrajavaram Police Station, East Godavari District. 2) A case has been registered against the petitioners herein for the offence punl'shable u/Sees,118(1),115(2) r/w 3(5) of B.N.S. -- _i r`-i- €jrrdZ i 2 3) The brief facts -of the case are that on 26.01.2025, at about 7:25 p.m., at Bolladavari Centre, K. Savaram Village, Undrajavaram Mandal, the defacto complainant filed a complaint and stated in his complaint that while his firm servant was cutting green grass and bringing it to the house, Al abused him with vulgar language when he was informed of the same. Later, the complainant asked Al about the abuse, and they had a dispute with each other. Al beat him with his hands and kicked him with his legs. Meanwhile, A2 arrived with a knife and struck the complainant on his head, causing injury. Later, the complainant's cousin arrl'ved and shifted him to the Government Hospital, Tanuku, for treatment. Hence, the police registered the crime against Al and A2. 4) Heard. Perused the record. 5) The learned counsel forthe petitioners/Al and A2 submits that a plain reading of the alleged report lodged by the de facto complainant suggests that there is no involvement of Al in the commission of the offence that would attract the offence under Section 118(2) of BNS. To appreciate the said submission, I have gone through the report lodged by the de facto COmP[ainant/Victim. lt appears that there Was a quarrel between € sE--- se r\ 3 I/ the lst petitioner/A1, as Al abused the de facto complainant. No specific accusatl'on has been made against Al regarding causing injury to the de facto complainanVvictim. However, a specific accusation has been made against the 2nd petI'tiOner/A2, Stating that he caused injury to the de facto complainant's head. After reviewing the material on record, this Court finds, based on the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, that the provisions of Section 118(2) of the BNS may not be applicable to the lSt petitioner/A1. However, considering the nature of the injury caused by A2, this Court is not l'nclined to grant anticipatory bail to the 2nd petitioner/A2. 6) Accordl-ngly, the anticipatory bail appII-CatjOn Of 2nd Petitioner/A2 is dismissed and the anticipatory bail application of lSt petitioner/Al is allowed. The lSt petitioner/Al is directed to surrender before the Station House Officer concerned within two (2) weeks from today and on such surrender, the lst petitioner/Al shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police offlcja[s and the lSt petl-tioner/Al shall cooperate for investigation and he shall appear before the investl'gating officer as and when his presence is required. The c3feJSy 4 1St petitioner/Al srf'all not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses. 7) In the result, the criminal petition is partly allowed. 8) With the above directions, the Criminal Petition is allowed. SD/-G.HEL ASSISTANT NAIDU //TRUE COPY// SECTl For --+,.`,....-..`__.-.-`,I.` To, 1. The Station House officer, Undrajavaram Police Station, East Godavari District 2. One CC to SRl. K V L NARASIMHA RAO Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court ofA.P[OUT] 4. One spare copy -, tr> <*73 is1! I I HIGH COURT TMR,J DATED :24/03/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.2105 of 2025 PARTLY ALLOWED _t-I