APHC010145592026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2215/2026 Between: 1.KOKKIRIGADDA WILLIAM KERY, S/O KOKKIRIGADDA MIKAYELU, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARSR/O,D-NO.3-79, PEDDA KOTTADA, KOTTADA,KRISHNA DISTRICT-521340. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Public Prosecutor,A.P High court Buildings, 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 pleased to enlarge the petitioner/Accused on bail in connection with the Crime dt. 18-12-2025 Vide F.I.R.No.361 of 2025 U/s69 BNS, on the file of SN Puram P.S, Vijayawada City and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.VARDHINEEDI SAI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2215/2026 ORDER: This Criminal Petition under Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the Petitioner seeking to enlarge him on bail in connection with Crime No.361 of 2025 of Satyanarayanapuram, Vijayawada City, which is registered for the offence punishable under Section 69 of BNS, 2023. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that at the time of the alleged offence, the de facto complainant is working as an Ophthalmologist in American Eye Hospital, Hyderabad. Further, the Petitioner had acquaintance with the de facto complainant since seven months prior to filing of the present complaint. During that period, it is alleged that the petitioner expressed his love towards the de facto Complainant and made a promise to marry her and committed sexual intercourse on her against her will. It is further alleged that on 20.07.2025, the Petitioner took a hotel at Vijayawada wherein, the Petitioner and the de facto Complainant spent for two days and during the said period, allegedly there is a physical relation between them. Petitioner allegedly promised her that he would marry her. While so, on 09.12.2025 the petitioner came to the house of the de facto complainant at Nadipudi and gave his wedding invitation to her father and thereby, the Petitioner cheated her without standing on his promise to marry her. Basing on a complaint given by the complainant, a case in Crime No.361 of 2025 is registered by the 3 Satyanarayanapuram Police Station against the Petitioner and he was arrested by the Police and sent him to the judicial custody on 05.01.2026. 3. Heard Sri Vardhineedi Sai Kiran, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent State. Perused the material on record. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case and that except bald and vague allegations, there is no legal material against the petitioner in strict proof thereof. Learned counsel would submit that the alleged offence took place in the month of September and the complaint was given on 12.12.2025 and there is an unexplained delay in filing the complaint for which there is no plausible explanation from the side of the prosecution and that the petitioner was in judicial custody since 05.01.2026 and any conditions may be imposed on the petitioner to the satisfaction of the Court and requested to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that it is a case of cheating the defacto complainant on the promise that he would marry her and on that promise, he had physical relationship with her and he married another woman and thereby the petitioner cheated the complainant. Further, the ingredients of Section 69 of BNS, 2023 is present against the Petitioner and that the two bail petitions filed before the Trial Court were dismissed. Further, earlier petitioner committed similar 4 offence which is the subject matter of Crime No.100 of 2019 and he is in habit of cheating women and that investigation is under progress. She would further submit that this is a second bail application filed by the petitioner. The earlier bail application was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 02.03.2026 in Crl.P.No.1446 of 2026. She would further submit that there are no change of circumstances from the date of dismissal of earlier bail application. She finally prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. Considering the submissions and on perusal of the material on record and in view of the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the petitioner, the stage of the investigation, and the fact that there are no change of circumstances from the date of dismissal of the earlier bail application, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail at this stage. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 24.03.2026. SAB 5 136 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2215/2026 Dt.24.03.2026 SAB