APHC010156522026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2393/2026 Between: 1. GUNTUR TARUN ANIL, S/O. APPARAO,AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/O. RAMAKRISHNA PURAMPRAKASAM CITY AND DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, ,REP. BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,NAWABPET POLICE STATION,SPSR NELLORE DISTRICTREP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SODUM ANVESHA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2393/2026 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.5 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.67/2024 of Nawabpet Police Station, SPSR Nellore District registered for the alleged offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC. 2. Heard Ms.Sodum Anvesha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing on behalf of the State. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the defacto complainant lodged a report on 15.03.2024 stating that on 13.03.2024, she had left her village to attend a wedding at Nellore. During her journey, she travelled in two autos and one RTC bus to reach her sister’s residence, where she kept her jewellery consisting of three boxes, valued at approximately Rs.5,10,000/-. Upon returning from the wedding, she noticed that the said gold jewellery was missing. After conducting a thorough search of the entire house and being unable to trace the same, she lodged a complaint regarding the missing jewellery. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner herein is Accused No.5 and that no specific overt acts are attributed to him in 3 the present matter. It is further submitted that the investigation might have been completed. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the police officials. 5. Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that the investigation is at nascent stage. She would further submit that there is a prima-facie evidence to establish the role of the petitioner in commission of the offence. Hence, if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail there is every likelihood to tamper the evidence and hamper the ongoing investigation and she finally prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material on record, the request of the petitioner cannot be considered at this juncture, since the petitioner has failed to establish a special case for grant of anticipatory bail. The case diary submitted before this Court by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would disclose prima-facie incriminating material against the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Court finds no merits in the Criminal Petition for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Hence, the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to surrender before the learned 4 Jurisdictional Magistrate and to move a regular bail application, and that a direction may be issued to dispose of the said application as expeditiously as possible. 8. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner 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: 06.04.2026. S D P 5 233 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2393/2026 06.04.2026 S D P