APHC010215112026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3285/2026 Between: 1. KODURI RAVI TEJA, S/O. MOHAN MOHAN RAO, AGED 28 YEARS,BEHIND NUKALAMMA TEMPLE, BUTTAIGUDEM ROAD,JANGAREDDIGUDEM VILLAGE, MANDAL,N/O. T. LAKSHMIPURAM V, DWARAKA TIRUMALA M. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH SHO, COMPLAINANTJANGAREDDIGUDEM P.S.,REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OFA.P., AT AMARAVATI. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to enlarge the Petitioner Accused No-1 on bail pending disposal of Crime No. 107/2026 of Jangareddigudem P.S., West Godavari District and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. YENNAM SUDHEER BABU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3285/2026 ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner/Accused No.1, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.107 of 2026 of Jangareddigudem P.S., registered for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 351(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, the de facto complainant developed acquaintance with one Ravathi, and both were in love. It is alleged that A1 spoke indecent words with the said Ravathi, leading to disputes between the A1 and the de facto complainant. Due to the said disputes, A1 developed a grudge and threatened to kill the de facto complainant. On 17.03.2026 at 5:00 pm., A1 to A5 hatched a plan, called the de facto complainant to Sai Baba Temple of Srinivasapuram Village and when the de facto complainant reached there, the accused surrendered him and attacked him with deadly weapons. It is further alleged that while A2 and A4 caught hold of the complainant, A5 beat him with rod and A1 attempted to stab him on his chest with a knife. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein is the Accused No.1 and He is innocent and was falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel would further submit that the de facto complainant 3 foisted this case with the help of other witnesses, and there are previous disputes with the petitioner in connection with the lover of the de facto complainant. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 19.03.2026. Learned counsel would further submit that the crucial part of the investigation might have been completed by this time. The petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family, and his continued incarceration would cause hardship to his dependents. The petitioner undertakes to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the Court. Learned counsel finally prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that the investigation is at crucial stage and is pending for apprehension of Accused Nos.2 and 4. She would further submit that there are specific overt-acts attributed against the petitioner. There are about thirty previous criminal cases registered against the petitioner/Accused No.1. If the petitioner is released on bail, there is every likelihood of his tampering with the evidence and hampering the ongoing investigation. She would further submit that, as per the wound certificates, the injuries clearly corroborate with the allegations made in the complaint. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor finally prays for dismissal of the petition. 5. Considering the submissions and the material on record, this Court finds that investigation is still at a crucial stage and is pending for the apprehension of Accused Nos. 2 and 4, and that specific overt acts are attributed to the petitioner, which are supported by the wound certificates, and 4 that there are thirty criminal antecedents against the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail at this stage. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 29.04.2026. UPS 5 18 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3285/2026 Dt.29.04.2026 UPS