APHC010462912026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE 10th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7727/2026 Between: SHAIK YUSUF ALI, S/O MAZEED,AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,R/O D.NO.15-245,SUNNAM BATTI STREET,YEMMIGANUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT- 518360. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by SHO, Yemmiganur Town Police Station,Through Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh,Amaravati, Guntur District- 522 238. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7727 of 2026 Dated 10.09.2026 The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the petitioner/Accused No.1 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.82 of 2026 of Yemmiganur Town Police Station, Kurnool District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 85 and 109(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. As seen from the record, this Court, vide common order dated 30.06.2026 in Crl.P.Nos.4823 and 4828 of 2026, dismissed the first anticipatory bail applications filed by the petitioner and the other accused. There are no merits in this petition. 4. In this regard, it is apposite to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in G.R. Ananda Babu v. State of Tamil Nadu1, wherein, at paragraph No. 6, it was held as under: 6.As a matter of fact, successive anticipatory bail applications ought not to be entertained and more so, when the case diary and the status report, clearly indicated that the accused (Respondent 2) is absconding and not cooperating with the investigation. The specious reason of change in circumstances cannot be invoked for successive anticipatory bail applications, once it is rejected by a speaking order and that too by the same Judge. 1 (2021) 16 SCC 725 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7727 of 2026 Dated 10.09.2026 5. Thus, in G.R.Ananda Babu supra, it was held that successive anticipatory bail applications are not maintainable when the accused is absconding and not cooperating with the investigation. A mere change in circumstances is not a valid ground once an earlier application has been rejected by a reasoned order. The order passed by this Court is also a speaking order answering all the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners. There are no merits in the petition. Hence, this Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 10.09.2026 RSI/DRNR 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.7727 of 2026 Dated 10.09.2026 22 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.7727 of 2026 Date:10.09.2026 RSI/DRNR