1 APHC010101232025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2131/2025 Between: Mohammaed Tanveer Ahmed ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. Y BHANUSRI AKHILA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2131 of 2025 ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, has been filed by the petitioner herein/Accused No.4, seeking regular bail, in Crime No. 382 of 2024 of Kancharapalem Police Station, Visakhapatnam District registered for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 308(5), 318 (4),131, 351(2), 61(2) of BNS, Section 67A of ITA, 2000-2008. 2. Case of the prosecution is that one Adireddi Sarat Teja/defacto complainant has been running a Coffee Shop at Visalakshi Nagar, Visakhapatnam for the last two years in the name of WABI ART CAFÉ. About six months prior to the occurrence of the offence, A1 visited his shop along with her friend Udaya (Navya) and introduced herself as Digital Marketer and then told that they would help him in development of Coffee Shop. On one day, A1 requested the defacto complainant to drive car and on the way, A1 sprayed something on his face and shoulders, for which he questioned and she told that it was a body mist. Thereafter, the defacto complainant felt drowsy and he insisted her to drop him back to his café house. After a few days, A1 invited him to her house situated at NGGO’s Colony for dinner, and she offered some juice, and insisted him to drink it. Thereafter, the defacto complainant felt drowsy and he woke up on the next day morning at her house. On that day evening A1 had showed some imitate photos in her mobile, which he was unaware. On seeing them, he was shocked and 3 questioned about the photos, but she skipped the topic and compelled the defacto complainant to her parties at her friend A2’s guest house situated in Bheemili. Later, A1 started demanding him to marry her and to give divorce to his wife, for which he denied and that A1 was threatening him that if he failed to marry her she would foist false rape case against him. A1 also threatened that her gang members A2 and others, staying in Vizianagaram would see his end. A1 also extorted his phone by showing the weapon by putting him under fear of death and got all his personal information and shared his live location on her mobile to track him continually. Later, on one day, A1 locked the defacto complainant in the washroom at her house and threatened him that she would call his family members and create a situation. After the defacto complainant locked house on 24.05.2024 A1 forced him to board her car to go to function near Simhachalam. Further A1 always compelled the defacto complainant to get into her drugs business with her partner Zoya, who is resident of Hyderabad for which he denied. Later, without his consent, she booked tickets to Hyderabad to meet their partners, but he denied. Thereafter A1 demanded him to give divorce to his wife and also to bring his mother’s jewellary and cash and further she locked him in room for two days and she went to Vijayawada. After her arrival from Vijayawada, again A1 threatened the defacto complainant to bring gold and cash and she also invited her friends to hostage him and demand money from his parents. As the defacto complainant denied A1 broke a glass a bottle and attacked him to kill, and 4 while she was in phone conversation with boy, the defacto complainant ran away from her home on 29.07.2024. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State. Perused the material on record. 4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 24.12.2024. By this time, the crucial part of the investigation might have completed. The petitioner is ready to furnish the sureties to the satisfaction of the Court. Accordingly, the learned Counsel finally prays to allow the petition. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the Petition stating that earlier bail application moved by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court vide Crl.P.No. 718 of 2025 dated 05.02.2025. There are no change of circumstances from the date of dismissal of the earlier application. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor finally prays for dismissal of the Petition. 6. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed on record, as rightly put by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the earlier application of the petitioner was dismissed on 05.02.2025 by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court on the ground that the investigation is in progress, some more witnesses are to be examined. The petitioner is involved in running Drug racket in Hyderabad and forced the defacto complainant to invest the amount in their drug business. Technical analysis report from FSL and some more material objects are yet to be obtained, some more audio call 5 conversations of A1 with A3 and A4 are yet to be transcribed. In the light of the submissions made, since there are no change of circumstances, from the date of dismissal of the application, this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. ____________________________________ Dr. VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date:27.03.2025 UPS 6 79 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P. No.2131 of 2025 Dated.27.03.2025 UPS