APHC010508602026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE 5th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8568/2026 Between: 1. MANYAM DURGARAO, S/0 MUSALAYYA RAMUDU,HINDU, AGED 44 YEARS,R/O RAGHUNADHAPURANI VILLAGE,RAJANAGARAM MANDALAM. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh,At Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. B PARAMESEWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.8568 of 2026 Dated 05.10.2026 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 petitioners/sole-accused, seeking grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.124 of 2026 of Prohibition and Excise Police Station, Rajamahendravaram South, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 7-B read with 8-A and 8-B of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020. 2. Mr.B. Parameswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that there are no specific overt acts attributable to the petitioner and that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole earning member of his 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. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohit, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and submits that the investigation is not yet completed and that there are 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.8568 of 2026 Dated 05.10.2026 specific overt acts attributable on the part of the petitioner. If the petitioner is enlarged on pre-arrest bail, he may not cooperate with the Investigating Officer and may evade the process of law. Therefore, he prays that the petition be dismissed. 4. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. As seen from the record, there are specific overt-acts attributed to the petitioner as it is alleged that he was indulged in dealing with 400 liters of FJ Wash in 4 plastic drums and also 5 liters of I.D. Liquor in a ploythene cover and that there are two similar adverse antecedents. In view of the aforesaid specific overt acts attributed to 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 who has allegedly dealt with 400 liters of FJ Wash and 5 liters of I.D. Liquor, 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. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 2 (2020) 5 SCC 1 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.8568 of 2026 Dated 05.10.2026 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: 05.10.2026 DRNR 5 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.8568 of 2026 Dated 05.10.2026 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.8568 of 2026 Date:05.10.2026 DRNR