APHC010663032025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12715/2025 Between: 1. CHIMAKURTHI NAGA VENKATA SAI KIRAN, S/O. NAGA BHUSHAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.16-1-6/3, G.B.C.ROAD, 21ST WARD, PONNURU, NIDUBROLU OLD TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Through the State Addl. Supdt. Of Police CID, R.O, Guntur, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SHAIK MEERAVALI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12715 of 2025 ORDER:- The Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of BNSS, is filed on behalf of the petitioner herein/A20 to grant anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.23 of 2024 of CID Police Station, Mangalagiri, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 316(5) and 61(2) of BNS. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State. Perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein is innocent and he was falsely implicated in the present crime. The petitioner would abide by any condition that this Court deems fit to impose while enlarging him on pre-arrest bail. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and would submit that the investigation is at crucial stage. 5. A perusal of the material on record shows that the allegation made against the petitioner herein is that he deposited an amount of Rs. 1.5 crores into his account, which was subsequently withdrawn. In addition to the cash taken by him and his middlemen, amounting to about Rs. 1.5 crores, he knowingly allowed fraudulent amounts to be deposited into his account and those of the 3 beneficiaries, thereby aiding and abetting the prime accused in the commission of the fraud. 6. In view of the specific overt acts attributed against the petitioner/Accused No.20, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, as per the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Panjab 1and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of (NCT of Delhi)2. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. However, as per the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, liberty is granted to the petitioner to surrender before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned within two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, and move an appropriate application before the learned Jurisdictional Court concerned. The learned Jurisdictional Court concerned shall endeavour to dispose of the said application in accordance with law, on its own merits, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor concerned, and shall pass appropriate orders within a period of one (01) week. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ DR.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date:27.01.2026 Asr 1 (1980) 2 SCC 565 2 (2020) 5 SCC 1 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO:12715 of 2025 27.01.2026 Asr