APHC010207032026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3132/2026 Between: GUDAPATI VEERASWAMY, S/O. EMMANNA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC:JOURNALIST R/O. FLAT NO.3, SARASWATHI COLONY, UPPAL,RANGA REDDY, TELANGANA STATE ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/Accused: 1. Dr. CHALLA SRINIVASA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the Petitioner / Accused, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.103 of 2026 on the file of Mangalagiri Rural Police Station, Guntur District, which is registered for the offence under Section 318(4) of BNS. 2. Heard Sri Challa Srinivasa Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner / Accused and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, Assistant Public Prosecutor for State / Respondent. 2 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner is innocent of the offence alleged against him and the de facto complainant foisted this case to settle the business disputes. It is further contended that the Petitioner never took the car of the De facto complainant and no cash and gold were placed in the car as alleged. Learned counsel would further submit that the offence alleged agasint the Petitioner is punishable with imprisonment of five years. Learned counsel would further submit that, material part of the investigation has been completed. It is submitted that the present complaint has been lodged one year after the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is ready to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the Court. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and would submit that there are specific allegations against the Petitioner. It is further submitted that the investigation is going on. There are no grounds to grant anticipatory bail at this stage. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition. 5. It is alleged in the complaint that, on 24.02.2025 Petitioner / Accused came to the house of the De facto complainant and both of them started in the car of the De fact complainant. By that time, the de facto complainant kept cash of Rs.1,80,000/- and 60 sovereigns of gold in the dash board of the Car. When they reached Atmakuru Junction, they stopped the car for having tea. At that time, the Petitioner / Accused stated the De facto complainant that he had urgent work to attend and took his car and did not return. 6. Having regard to the nature of the allegations, the period of delay in lodging the complaint, the stage of investigation, and the fact that the offence 3 alleged is punishable with imprisonment up to seven years, this Court is of the view that a limited protection can be granted to the Petitioner, while at the same time ensuring that the investigation is not hampered. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of: (i) Investigating Officer is at liberty to complete the investigation, in accordance with law. (ii) In the event of any coercive action sought to be taken against the Petitioner / Accused, concerned Police Authorities are directed to scrupulously follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of BNSS. (iii) The Petitioner / Accused shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required, shall cooperate with further investigation, if any, and shall provide any information or material for the purpose of investigation. (iv) This protection will be continued to the Petitioner / Accused subject to his conduct and cooperation to the investigation failing which, the prosecution is at liberty to take appropriate steps. (v) If any incriminating material is found against the Petitioner / Accused and if his custodial interrogation is necessary, Investigating Officer is at liberty to obtain necessary permission from the jurisdictional Court and proceed in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 28.04.2026 Note: Issue C.C by tomorrow B/o. Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.3132 of 2026 Dt.28.04.2026 Dinesh