APHC010499472026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE 28th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8396/2026 Between: 1. KOTA CHANDRASEKHAR, S/O KOTA SURYANARAYANA,AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS,R/O D.NO.9-332, KOTHA COLONY, NEAR WATER TANK ROAD,RAVULAPALEM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, DR.BR. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by Station House Officer,Ravulapalem P.S, Dr.B.R. Ambedkar Konaseema District,Rep. Through the Public Prosecutor, State of Andhra Pradesh,High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. AJAY KUMAR KANAPARTHI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: This 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 grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.188 of 2026 of Ravulapalem Police Station, Dr.B.R. Ambedkar 2 KonaseemaDistrict, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 333, 324(6), 351(2), 74, 79 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. Mr.K.Ajay Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated by the police. He is law-abiding citizen and is the sole breadwinner of the family. The petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of the foregoing submissions, the learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice. 3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing submissions, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. As seen from the record, this is the 2nd bail application filed by the petitioner/Accused No.1. This Court, in Criminal Petition No.7620 of 2026, on 08.09.2026, dismissed the 1st bail application. There has been no change in 3 circumstances from the date of dismissing the 1st bail application till the date of filing of this petition. Granting of pre-arrest bail is neither a licence nor permission or passport to commit crime, as per the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab1and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of (NCT of Delhi)2.The discretionary relief of granting Anticipatory Bail cannot be granted to the petitioner, inasmuch as the accusations are well-founded against the petitioner.In the absence of any change in circumstances, this Court finds no merit in the Criminal Petition, and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 28.09.2026 BMS 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 2 (2020) 5 SCC 1