1 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4692 of 2026 Dated 17.06.2026 APHC010291062026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4692/2026 Between: 1. SANDYAPOGU KRISHNA PRASAD ALIAS CHINNI, S/O. LATE S. VENGANNA,AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT IN ITI GIRLS COLLEGER/O THANDRAPADU VILLAGE, LAKSHMI NAGAR,KUMOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its public ProsecutorHigh court of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravati ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. RAMALAKSHMANA REDDY SANEPALLI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4692 of 2026 Dated 17.06.2026 Petitioner/Accused No.1 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.135 of 2026 of Kurnool III Town Police Station, Kurnool District registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 126(2) and 109(1) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on 12.05.2026 at Sreerama Nagar, Kurnool. The accused restrained the complainant and Accused No.1 attacked him with a knife with intent to kill, causing injury to his hand. The other accused assaulted him with stones and rods and attempted to throttle him. The injured was shifted to GGH, Kurnool for treatment. The incident arose due to prior enmity, and the complaint was later lodged at the Police Station. 4. Mr.S. Rama Lakshmana Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 submits the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to political rivalry. He argues that the alleged offences under Sections 126(2) and 109(1) of ‘the BNS.,’ are not attracted in the present case. It is submitted that he is a government employee with no criminal antecedents and the injuries are simple in nature. The earlier bail petition before the Sessions Court was dismissed, leading to the present petition. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation and 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4692 of 2026 Dated 17.06.2026 asserts that he will neither abscond nor tamper with evidence and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner. 5. Per contra, Sri K.Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed granting of pre-arrest bail contending that the investigation is at a nascent stage and the custodial interrogation of the Petitioner is imperative for eliciting material facts. It is submitted that if the Petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail, there is a grave apprehension that he may not cooperate with the investigation and may evade the process of law. 6. It is further urged that the prosecution also apprehends that the Petitioner may influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, thereby obstructing the fair and impartial investigation. In view of the seriousness of the allegations and the potential risk to the integrity of the investigation, it is prayed that the instant bail application be dismissed. 7. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. 8. 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 is entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?” 9. As seen from the record, there are specific allegations against the petitioner/Accused No.1 with regard to his active role in the commission of the offence. In view of the specific allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail as it would amount to granting 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4692 of 2026 Dated 17.06.2026 protection or shield to the persons against whom specific allegations are levelled, as per the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab1 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)2. Hence, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 17.06.2026 KMS 1 (1980) 2 SCC 565 2 (2020) 5 SCC 1 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4692 of 2026 Dated 17.06.2026 174 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4692/2026 Date: 17.06.2026 KMS