1 APHC010111372026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1705/2026 Between: 1. CHIMATA VENKATA SAI, S/O. SREENU,AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS,R/O. DOOR NO. 17-156, DARGA CENTER, ISLAMPETSINGARAYAKONDA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/Accused No.2 in Crime No. 194 of 2025 of Singarayakonda Police Station, Prakasam District in the event of arrest Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. K RAGHU VEER Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1705/2026 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.2 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 194 of 2025 of Singarayakonda Police Station, Prakasam District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 318(1) r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short “BNS”) and Section 5 of APPDFE Act, 1999. 2. Heard Mr.K.Raghu Veer, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. The case of prosecution, in brief is that Accused Nos. 1 and 2, a mother and son, conducted unauthorized chit schemes by falsely claiming to have a license, collected large sums from the de facto complainant and other subscribers, and failed to repay the bid amounts after auction. When questioned, they allegedly abused and threatened the subscribers, thereby cheating them of about Rs.36,05,000/- and misappropriating the funds for personal use. Based on the complaint, a case was registered in Crime No. 194/2025 under the relevant provisions of the BNS and the APPDFE Act, 1999. 3 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent, he is no way concerned with the present case. The petitioner and his mother were falsely implicated in this case by the defacto complainant to settle his scores. He further contended that the material part of the investigation has been completed and the Accused No.1 is already released on bail. There is no material to attract the offence under Section 5 of APPDFE Act. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the Court to secure his presence for the purpose of investigation. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that there are specific allegations made against the petitioner and if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, there is every likelihood of his interference in the investigation and he may threaten the witnesses. She would further submit that the Accused No.1 was granted bail only on the ground that she is an old aged woman. The petitioner/Accused No.2 cannot claim that he is entitled for anticipatory bail. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor finally prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. Considering the submissions made, upon perusal of the material on record, and in light of the nature and gravity of the allegations leveled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage. 4 7. In that view of the matter, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner/accused No.2 is at liberty to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned within one (01) week from the date of receipt of copy of this order, and move an appropriate application before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned. The learned Jurisdictional Court concerned is directed to dispose of the said application in accordance with law, on its own merits by giving due and sufficient opportunity to the learned Public Prosecutor concerned, and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. ___________________________________ DR.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 10.03.2026. UPS 5 260 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1705 OF 2026 10.03.2026 UPS