APHC010282692026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: Between: 1. BONAM GANESH, , S/O. K.S. VIJAYA SARADHI,AGED 34 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR,R/O. D.NO.1 VILLAGE,ELAMANCHILI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep by its Public Court of Andhra Pradesh,At Amaravati. 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 No. 1 on bail, inquiry and trial in Cr. No. 72/2026 Elamanchili Police Station, West Godavari District Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4514/2026 BONAM GANESH, , S/O. K.S. VIJAYA SARADHI,AGED 34 YEARS, OCC CONTRACTOR,R/O. D.NO.1-60, BURUGUPALLI VILLAGE,ELAMANCHILI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh,At Amaravati. ...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 Courtpleased to release the petitioner/Accused No. 1 on bail, inquiry and trial in Cr. No. 72/2026 Elamanchili Police Station, Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3521] THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO BONAM GANESH, , S/O. K.S. VIJAYA SARADHI,AGED 34 YEARS, 60, BURUGUPALLI VILLAGE,ELAMANCHILI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED Prosecutor,High ...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 pleased to release the petitioner/Accused No. 1 on bail, inquiry and trial in Cr. No. 72/2026 Elamanchili Police Station, 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4514/2026 ORDER: This Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity “the BNSS”) by the petitioner/accused No.1 for granting of regular bail in connection with Crime No.72 of 2026 of Elamanchili Police Station, West Godavari District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Section 105 of the, (for brevity ‘BNS Act’). 2. Heard Sri D.Pruna Chandra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State/respondent. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 16.04.2026 at about 10.30 p.m., during a Jatara held at Burugupalli Village, Elamanchili Mandal, the petitioner/Accused No.1, who allegedly harboured a longstanding grudge against one Bonam Sriramakrishna arising out of local disputes and ancestral property settlement issues, conspired with certain gangsters and hired goons to eliminate him. It is alleged that the accused attacked Sriramakrishna during the Jatara. When Sriramakrishna escaped, accused No.2, acting at the instance of Accused No.1, intentionally drove a car in a rash and dangerous manner through the crowd. In the course of the incident, the vehicle hit one Devarapu Veeraswamy, causing fatal injuries. It is further alleged that while fleeing from the scene, the accused again attempted to target Sriramakrishna. 3 The injured Devarapu Veeraswamy was shifted to Area Hospital, Palakol, where he was declared brought dead. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. He submits that there are no specific overt acts attributed to the petitioner and that he has been implicated due to political and local rivalry. He further submitted that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and has been in judicial custody since 21.04.2026. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen having permanent adobe and he will cooperate with the investigation and urged to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehementely opposed the bail application contending that the investigation is still at a nascent stage. She further submits that the petitioner is the prime accused in the case and played a pivotal role in the commission of the offence. She further submits that material witnesses are yet to be examined, call detail records are yet to be retrieved, and financial transactions between the accused and other persons involved are under investigation. It is also brought to the notice of the Court that there are two adverse criminal antecedents against the petitioner. 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned counsel on both sides. I have perused the entire record. 4 7. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration is: “Whether the petitioner/accused No.1 is entitled for grant of bail?” 8. A perusal of the case diary and the material placed before this Court prima facie discloses serious allegations against the petitioner. The statements of the de-facto complainant and other witnesses indicate that the petitioner is alleged to have played a pivotal role in the occurrence that resulted in the death of the deceased. The investigation is at nascent stage, only sixteen witnesses have been examined and several material witnesses remain to be examined. Further, the bank transactions in between the accused and the victims have to be ascertained and call data record have to be retrieved. The petitioner is in judicial custody for the past 55 days only. 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity and nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, and the stage of investigation, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, as the grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are not found to be reasonable and convincing. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 17.06.2026 KKV 5 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4514/2026 Date: 17.06.2026 KKV