Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11826 (AP)

Boddukuru Prasad Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

CRLP/7841/2026 · 2026-09-28

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010468292026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY, THE 29th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7841/2026 Between: 1. BODDUKURU PRASAD REDDY, S/O. PERA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,R/O. KOLIMI STREET, ANUMASAMUDRAM VILLAGE,A.S. PETA MANDAL, SPS NELLORE DISTRICT, A.P ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SRINIVASA RAO NARRA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 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, for granting of seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.14 of 2026 of A.S. Peta Police Station, SPSR Nellore District, 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 115(2), 351(2) and 49 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. Sri Narra Srinivasa Rao, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that this is the second anticipatory bail petition. He submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. Learned Counsel further submits that the investigation has been completed, except for the filing of the charge sheet. He also submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the Petitioner. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is ready to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of this Court. Therefore, he prays that this Court may be pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner. 4. Per contra, Mr. K. Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, submits that this is the second anticipatory bail application, which is not maintainable in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in G.R. Ananda Babu v. State of Tamil Nadu1. Hence, he prays that the present application be dismissed in the interest of justice and to safeguard the sanctity of the investigative process. 5. Indeed, this Court, by order dated 22.06.2026 in Crl.P.No.4509 of 2026, dismissed the earlier anticipatory bail application on merits. L.W.1 suffered grievous injury allegedly at the hands of the Petitioner. There has been no 1 (2021) 16 SCC 725 3 change in circumstances from the date of dismissal of the earlier bail application till the filing of the present bail application. As seen from the wound certificate, L.W.1 suffered grievous injury. Specific overt acts are attributed to the Petitioner. 6. In view of the specific allegations and overt acts attributed to the Petitioner/Accused No.1, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail as it would amount to granting protection or shield to the persons against whom specific allegations are levelled, as per the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab2 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)3. 7. The Hon’ble Apex Court in G.R. Ananda Babu supra wherein at para No.6 as under : “6…As a matter of fact, successive anticipatory bail applications ought not to be entertained and more so, when the case diary and the status report, clearly indicated that the accused (Respondent 2) is absconding and not cooperating with the investigation. The specious reason of change in circumstances cannot be invoked for successive anticipatory bail applications, once it is rejected by a speaking order and that too by the same Judge.” 8. There are specific overt acts attributed to the Petitioner/Accused No.1. Hence, there are no merits in this Criminal Petition. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 29.09.2026 KMS 2 (1980) 2 SCC 565 3 (2020) 5 SCC 1 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7841 of 2026 Date: 29.09.2026 KMS