APHC010657112025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12601/2025 Between: KONDETI RAVI, S/O.LATE SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURE, R/O.DOOR NO. 106, FLOOR, VENKATARAMANA RESIDENCY, KANKIPADU MAIN ROAD, KANKIPADU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT AMARAVATHI. 2. MADDALI SRIKANTH, S/O. JOHAN MARK, AGE 39 YEARS, OCC. PAINTER, PEDAKONDURU VILLAGE, DUGGIRALA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. RESPONDENT NO.2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE COURT ORDER DATED 12.12.2025 IN CRL.P.NO.12601 OF 2025. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: P V N KIRAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. SUBBA RAO JANDHYAM 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.12601 of 2025 Dated 08.01.2026 The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity 8the BNSS9), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.238 of 2025 of Kankipadu Police Station, Krishna District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused herein for the offences punishable under Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity 8the BNS9). 2. Mr. P. V. N. Pavan Kumar, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and that he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking him to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the Petitioner is the sole breadwinner of the family and his arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions that this Court may impose while granting bail to the Petitioner. 3. It is further submitted that the Petitioner has a permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of his absconding or evading the process of law. The Petitioner has cooperated with the investigation thus 3 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.12601 of 2025 Dated 08.01.2026 far and assures continued cooperation in future proceedings, and it is urged to allow the Petition. 4. Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, strenuously opposed to grant of bail and the prosecution further apprehends that the Petitioner, if released, may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby obstructing the course of justice. It is also urged that there exists a real and imminent risk of the Petitioner absconding and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the progress of the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioner does not deserve the discretionary relief of bail and it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 5. Sri Subba Rao Jandhyam, the learned Legal Aid Counsel for respondent No.2, vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner/Accused on the ground that the investigation is not completed and some more material witnesses are to be examined, and it is urged to dismiss the petition. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Legal Aid Counsel for respondent No.2 and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 7. As seen from the record, the investigation is not completed. The injured allegedly suffered grievous injury in the hands of the 4 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.12601 of 2025 Dated 08.01.2026 petitioner/Accused. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner/Accused was involved in a case in Cr. No.57 of 2025 under Sections 118(1), 324(3), 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of 8the BNS9 of Kankipadu Police Station, Krishna District. There are four eye-witnesses to the alleged occurrence. 8. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner/Accused and in view of the pendency of the investigation, the request for enlarging him on bail at this point of time is not found convincing or reasonable. Hence, this Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 9. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date:08.01.2026 RSI 5 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.12601 of 2025 Dated 08.01.2026 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12601 of 2025 Date: 08.01.2026 RSI