APHC010490502026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE 24th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8258/2026 Between: 1. HUSSAIN PEERA ALIAS SHAIK HUSSAIN PEERA, S/O SHAIKHAJIVALI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATIONCULTIVATION, R/O D. NO. 3/3, PERAVALI VILLAGE,SINGANAMALA MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT,515701. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. ALLU HARI NARAYANA 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, seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime 2 No.60 of 2025 of Singanamala Police Station, Ananthapuramu District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 351(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 06.06.2025 at about 05:00 p.m., Accused Nos.1 and 2 voluntarily caused hurt to the complainant by beating him with stones, hands and legs, thereby causing multiple injuries to him, pursuant to a land dispute between them. Hence, the crime. 3. Mr.A.Hari Narayana, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that there is a delay of about three days in lodging the complaint. The petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated by the police. The petitioner is a 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. 4. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohit, 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 3 process of law. In view of the foregoing submissions, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. As seen from the record, the alleged incident took place on 06.06.2025, and the report was lodged on 09.06.2025. The delay in lodging the complaint, by itself, cannot be considered as a sufficient ground for granting pre-arrest bail, particularly when the prosecution has placed medical material showing that the injured sustained grievous injuries. Further, the statement of the victim discloses specific overt acts attributed to the petitioner. It is alleged that both the accused beat the injured with stones, hands and legs, thereby causing injuries to him. 7. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the request of the petitioner for grant of pre-arrest bail cannot be considered, as there are specific allegations and overt acts attributed to the petitioner. 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 Punjab1 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of (NCT of Delhi)2. There are no merits in this case warranting grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Hence, this Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 2 (2020) 5 SCC 1 4 8. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 24.09.2026 BMS