1 APHC010418312025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8439/2025 Between: 1. SALVAJI NARENDER, S/O LATE MARUTHI SALVAJI, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO.G-4, MADHULATHA HOMES, DURGA NAGAR COLONY, KISTARDDY PETA, BEERAMGUDA, HYDERABAD CITY, TELANGANA STATE. 2. S HYNDHAVI, W/O NARENDER, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O FLAT NO.G-4, MADHULATHA HOMES, DURGA NAGAR COLONY, KISTARDDY PETA, BEERAMGUDA, HYDERABAD CITY, TELANGANA STATE. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY SHO, II TOWN POLICE STATION, ADONI, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI. 2. B RAMESH, S/O. B. MANOHAR, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT ENGINEERS' COLONY, YEMMIGANUR ROAD, ADONI - 518301, KURNOOL DISTRICT. RESPONDENT NO.2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE COURT ORDER DATED 16.09.2025 IN I.A.NO.1 OF 2025 IN CRL.P.NO.8439 OF 2025. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. YALLABANDI RAMATIRTHA 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 3. T B L MURTHY The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8439 OF 2025 ORDER:- The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.161 of 2024 of II Town Police Station, Adoni, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 314, 316(4), 344, 338, 340 and 61(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘the BNS’). 2. Heard Mr.A.Syam Sundar Reddy, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Mr.K.Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and Mr.Yallabandi Ramatirtha, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 26.10.2024, at about 11:00 a.m., the complainant, who is the General Manager of the Group of Partha Dental Hospitals, submitted a report stating that accused Nos.1 to 7 were working in the company and were entrusted with the responsibility of obtaining licences from the concerned authorities to run the hospitals and for empanelment under various schemes at different places, as well as for periodic renewal of licences for the hospitals situated at various locations. They were also authorised to collect amounts from the complainant and the office for meeting the above said purposes. It subsequently came to light that 4 accused Nos.1 to 5 misappropriated an amount of Rs.2 crores belonging to the Group of Partha Dental Hospitals by abusing the trust reposed in them. They allegedly hatched a plan, fabricated accounts, collected an amount of about Rs.2 crores, misappropriated the same, and thereby cheated the management. Basing on the said complaint, the present crime was registered. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the allegations against the petitioners are that they misappropriated an amount of Rs.2 crores from respondent No.2 institution. It is further submitted that the petitioners could not produce their bank statements before this Court, as directed, since the accounts were frozen at the request of the police in the present matter. The learned counsel also submits that the petitioners are falsely implicated, they are innocents, and are the sole breadwinners of their respective families. It is further submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to furnish sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court to secure their presence for the purpose of investigation. 5. The learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that the case pertains to misappropriation of funds and that the investigation is at a nascent stage. It is submitted that the victim institution suffered a loss of Rs.2 crores due to the acts of the petitioners. It is further submitted that accused No.2 is the wife of accused No.1 and that accused No.1 purchased property in the name of accused No.2. The learned counsel also submits that the petitioners 5 have introduced a new case by making allegations against the investigating agency as well as the defacto complainant in the affidavit subsequently filed in the present matter, and prays for dismissal of the criminal petition. 6. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are seven accused in the case and that accused No.2 is the wife of accused No.1. It is submitted that accused No.2 is running a business by utilising the proceeds of crime and that the investigation is at a nascent stage. So far only 10 witnesses are examined. It is further submitted that, in the event of release of the petitioners, there is every likelihood of interference with the investigation and tampering with evidence, and therefore vehemently opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 7. Considering the submissions made, upon perusal of the material on record, and in light of the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners at this juncture. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. 8. In the result, the criminal petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. ___________________________________ DR.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 22.01.2026 S D P 6 86 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8439 OF 2025 22.01.2026 S D P