APHC010103992026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1583/2026 Between: ALUGU ANAND SEKHAR, S/O JOHN FREDERIC, AGED 57 YEARS, R/O DR.NO.18-132,NEAR POLICE STATION, ASWARAOPET ROAD,JANGAREDDYGUDEM, WEST GODAWARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.3 AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH,HIGH COURT BUILDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI,GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. GANGULAGUTHI MANI BALA SARASWATHI, W/O LATE SUDHAKAR, AGED 28 YEARS,R/O TANUKU MANDAL, WEST GODAWARI DISTRICT.PH.NO.9502771270 ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. G SRI HARSHA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. VELAGANI NARASIMHULU 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed seeking to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner / Accused No.3, in connection with Crime No.51 of 2026 on the file of Jangareddygudem Police Station, Eluru District, which is registered for the 2 offence under Section 108 read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 3(2)(V) of SCs & STs (PoA)Act. 2. Heard Sri G.Sri Harsha, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Sri K.Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for State / Respondent No.1 and Sri A.Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel who filed vakalat for Respondent No.2. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that there are no specific allegations against the Petitioner and the Petitioner is falsely implicated in the present crime. Learned counsel would further submit that the Petitioner is no way concerned with the alleged offence. It is submitted that the Petitioner is ready to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the Court. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for Respondent No.2 would submit that there are specific allegations against the Petitioner and the investigation is in progress. It is further submitted that five other cases are pending against the Petitioner. It is submitted that Accused Nos.1 and 4 are arrested and are in judicial custody. It is further argued that the petition filed by Accused No.2 seeking anticipatory bail was also dismissed. It is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the Petitioner. 5. Considering the submissions made and a bare perusal of the material placed on record would show that the investigation is still in progress and the prosecution asserts that there are specific allegations against the Petitioner. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that five other criminal 3 cases are pending against the Petitioner. Considering the nature of the allegations and the stage of investigation, this Court is of the view that the Petitioner has not made out a case warranting exercise of discretion under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner. 6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:05.03.2026 Dinesh 4 THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1583 of 2026 DATE:05.03.2026 Dinesh