APHC010480432026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY, THE 25th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8093/2026 Between: K GOPAL, S/O. SREENIVASULU,AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,R/O. VEERAPUNAYANI PALLI VILLAGE,VEERAPUNAYANI PALLI MANDAL,YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by its Public Prosecutor,High Court Building, Amaravati,Through the Forest Range Officer,Vempalli Range,Kadapa District. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: JESHTADI SUNIL KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.8093 of 2026 Dated 25.09.2026 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, seeking grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with O.R./Cr.No.181/2025-2026 of Vempalli Forest Range, Kadapa District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 303(2) read with Section 3(5), 49, 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’), and Section 20(1)(c)(ii)(iii)(iv)(vi)(x) read with 20(1)(d) (i) (a), 36(a) read with Section 32A, 32B, 32C, 29(4)(a)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967, Rule 3(2)(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Sander Wood and Red Sander Wood Transit Rules, 1969 and Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Sander Wood and Red Sander Wood Possession Rules, 1989. 2. Mr. Jeshtadi Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that there are no specific over acts attributable to the petitioner and that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole earning member of the family, and, therefore, if he is incarcerated, it would cause undue hardship to his dependants. He is a law-abiding citizen. Hence, it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.8093 of 2026 Dated 25.09.2026 3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and submitted that, though the charge sheet has already been filed, the accusations against the petitioner are well founded. Hence, he prayed that the Criminal 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, the petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.1. It is alleged by the prosecution that the petitioner was involved in dealing with six logs of red sanders wood, weighing about 818 kgs. The prosecution further alleges that the petitioner is a coolie. After completion of a thorough investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed. The allegations against the petitioner are prima facie supported by the material available on record. 6. In view of the specific overt acts attributed against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, as it would amount to giving a shield, or protection or license to the petitioner against whom specific allegations have been made, as per the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Panjab1 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of (NCT of Delhi)2. Having regard to the facts 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 (2020) 5 SCC 1 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.8093 of 2026 Dated 25.09.2026 and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner herein as there are no merits. 7. 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: 25.09.2026 RSI 5 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.8093 of 2026 Dated 25.09.2026 79 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.8093 of 2026 Date:25.09.2026 RSI