APHC010721462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 89/2026 Between: 1.KARANAM RAGHAVARAO, RDD, WDCW RETIRED, ELURU, R/O RAHUL RESIDENCY, Z.P.COLONY, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. A.P. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, NELAPADU, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST. 2.KORADA VIJAY KUMAR ALIAS VIJAY, R/O D.NO. 41-21/4-28, BRAHMARAMBAPURAM, KRISHNALANKA, VIJAYAWADA, 3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MACHAVARAM POLICE STATION, VIJAYAWADA CITY, N.T.R. DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.T V V KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2.SUNKARA RAJENDRA PRASAD 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 89/2026 ORDER: The Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the petitioner/defacto complainant seeking cancellation of bail granted in favour of the 2nd respondent/A.1 by the learned VIII Additional District Judge-cum-IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Vijayawada, in Crl.M.P. No.848 of 2021 in Crime No.555 of 2021, vide order, dated 28.12.2021. 2. Heard Sri T.V.V.Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mrs. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, representing the State/Respondent No.1 and Sri. Sunkara Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner brought to the notice of this Court, in fact they have filed W.P.No.2256 of 2024, which is pending for consideration before the Coordinate Bench of this Court, seeking to transfer the investigation and in this matter to the CBI wherein learned Judge has granted stay not to proceed in a discharge petition filed by A.13 before the trial Court. 4. It is represented that the petitioner was granted bail by the Sessions Court vide Crl.M.P.No.848 of 2021, dated 28.12.2021. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, representing the State, submits that case, which is registered for the offence under Section 506 IPC basing on the information given by the petitioner to the effect that they are receiving phone calls from unknown numbers, was closed since it is undetected. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would further submit that there is a threat to the life of the defacto complainant and their family members in this matter. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would further submit that the 3 Court may issue appropriate directions to the police to protect the interest of the defacto complainant. 6. This Court perused the order granting bail to the petitioner wherein the following conditions were imposed : “The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the court.” 7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and upon careful perusal of the impugned order, dated 28.12.2021, passed in Crl.M.P. No.848 of 2021 granting bail to the 2nd respondent/A.1, this Court is of the prima facie view that, having regard to the nature and gravity of the offence alleged, particularly in a case of murder, the learned Judge ought to have imposed more stringent conditions while enlarging the accused on bail rather than imposing a single condition that “he shall not leave India without permission of the court”. 8. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that, instead of cancelling the bail granted to the 2nd respondent/A.1, the same shall be continued, subject to the imposition of additional conditions. Accordingly, the bail granted to the 2nd respondent/A.1 is hereby confirmed, subject to his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada. In addition thereto, the 2nd respondent/A.1 shall strictly comply with the following conditions: i. The 2nd respondent/A1 shall appear before the Station House Officer, concerned, on every day between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till disposal of the trial in Sessions Case No.178 of 2022 on 4 the file of the Court of VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, VIjayawada. ii. The 2nd respondent/A.1 shall surrender his passport, if any, before the Trial Court and shall not leave India without prior permission of the said Court. 9. The Superintendent of Police/Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada, is directed to take all necessary steps to ensure adequate protection and security to the defacto complainant and the witnesses in this case until the disposal of the case by the trial Court, in accordance with law, and to ensure that no untoward incident occurs. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 18.02.2026. SAB 5 204 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 89 of 2026 Dt.18.02.2026 SAB