APHC010120062026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1848/2026 Between: 1. SHAIK ABDULLA ALIAS MUNNA, S/O. YUSUF, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,OCC: LABOUR/OPERATOR, R/O. ISTLANE, ISLAMPETA, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT,ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P.,AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ONGOLE TALUK POLICE STATION, PRAKASAMDISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): 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 pleased to enlarge the Petitioner on regular bail in Crime No. 23 of 2026 on the file of Ongole Taluk Police Station, Prakasam District, for the offences alleged under Sections 123, 305(a) and 329(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on such terms and conditions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interests of justice Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 2 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1848/2026 ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner/Accused, seeking regular bail, in Crime No. 23 of 2026 on the file of Ongole Taluk Police Station, Prakasam District, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 123, 305(a), 329 (4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023. 2. Heard Sri Jada Sravan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakhmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.01.2026, at about 14:30 hours, the accused entered the residence of the defacto complainant, an elderly woman aged about 78 years, under the pretext of enquiry, administered a stupefying substance through handkerchief and committed theft of a gold chain weighing approximately 3 ½ sovereigns. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein is innocent and he is in no way concerned with the alleged crime. There are no criminal antecedents against him. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 12.01.2026. The case of the prosecution solely relies on the alleged confession said to have been made by the petitioner while he is in police custody. Except the alleged confession statement, there is no other 4 incriminating material against the petitioner. He would further submit that most of the investigation might have been completed by this time. The petitioner is ready to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the Court. He finally prays to allow the petition. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that the investigation has been completed and a charge sheet has already been filed. She further submitted that a Test Identification Parade has been conducted, which prima facie shows the involvement of the petitioner, and that the gold has been recovered from Muthoot Finance, where it was pledged in the name of the petitioner. She contended that a prima facie case is clearly made out against the petitioner. She finally prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material placed on record, as rightly contended by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the investigation has been completed, charge sheet has also been filed, and the Test Identification Parade prima facie shows the involvement of the petitioner. Further, the gold recovered from Muthoot Finance, pledged in the name of the petitioner, supports the allegations. In view of the seriousness of the offences and the material collected during the course of investigation, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail at this stage. 5 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the learned Trial Judge is directed to complete the proceedings and dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible, without granting any adjournment in a casual way by mere asking. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 13.03.2026. UPS 6 226 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1848/2026 Dt.13.03.2026 UPS