APHC010107802025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2262/2025 Between: Verriboina Prasad Yadav ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. RAMESH VODNALA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The criminal petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of "Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita" (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking for enlarging the petitioner on bail in connection with the crime registered in F.I.R. No.6 of 2025 at Chapadu Police Station, YSR Kadapa District for the alleged 2 offence punishable under Section 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. The allegations of the prosecution, in brief, are that on 15.01.2025, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint stating that her husband Venkataiah was accidentally fallen in the water well situated at Nakkaladinne village, after completion of the dinner in the fields of the petitioner; based on the said complaint, police registered a case. The police after due investigation, altered Section of law from Section 194 of ‘the BNSS.,’ to Section 108 of ‘the BNS.,’ and arrested the petitioner on 05.02.2025. In the investigation, it is revealed that the petitioner had organized dinner in his agricultural fields for which the deceased also attended. The deceased requested the petitioner to pay his wage arrears, the petitioner replied to the deceased in a harsh way. Therefore, the deceased got severely disappointed and took an extreme decision, jumped into the well nearby and ended his life. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had not committed any offence. The ingredients of Section 108 of ‘the BNS.,’ would not attract; petitioner is the sole bread-winner of his family. He would abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and urged to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 3 4. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed for granting of bail on ground that four (04) more witnesses have to be examined and the FSL report is yet to be received. 5. I have perused the record. 6. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 05.02.2025, that is nearly 59 days. The offence under Section 108 of ‘the BNS.,’ is punishable upto 10 years. As per Section 187(3) of ‘the BNSS.,’ the detention cannot be authorized beyond 60 days where the offence is punishable with imprisonment upto 10 years. 7. In view of the gravity of the allegations of the prosecution, period of detention in the judicial custody by the petitioner, material portion of the investigation is completed, of course, receipt of the RFSL report is nothing to do with the role to be played by the petitioner, if he is enlarged on bail, the investigating officer has taken sufficient time for examination of the witnesses, there are merits in the petition to consider with following conditions: In the result, the criminal petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail subject to he execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with 4 two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mydukur. ii. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly influence or threaten the witnesses and shall not hamper the investigation. iii. The petitioner shall not indulge a similar offence. _________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Dt: 04.04.2025 SCH 5 87 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2262/2025 04.04.2025 SCH