Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3703 (AP)

SK Yahiya v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

CRLP/4823/2026 · 2026-06-29

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.4823 and 4828 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : Date of uploading : APHC010305222026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY, THE 30th DAY OF JUNE 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NOS: 4823 and 4828 of 2026 CRIMINAL PETITION NOS: 4823 of 2026 Between: 1. SK YAHIYA, S/O MAZEED,AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,R/OD.NO. 15- 245,SUNNAM BATTI HASAN STREET,YEMMIGANUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT- 518360. 2. SHAIK IRSHAD, S/O MAZEED,AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,R/OD.NO. 15-245,SUNNAM BATTI HASAN STREET,YEMMIGANUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT- 518360. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by SHO, Yemmiganur Town Police Station, Through Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, Guntur District- 522 238. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4828/2026 Between: 1. SHAIK YUSUF ALI, S/O MAZEED,AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,R/O D.NO. 15-245,SUNNAM BATTI STREET,YEMMIGANUR, KURNOOL 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.4823 and 4828 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 DISTRICT- 518360. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by SHO, Yemmiganur Town Police Station,Through Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh,Amaravati, Guntur District- 522 238. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: These two Criminal Petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order, as the Petitioners in the two petitions are different, but the crime registered against them is one and the same. 2. Crl.P.No.4823 of 2026 has been filed by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.82 of 2026 of Yemmiganur Town Police Station, Kurnool District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 85 and 109(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNS‟). 3. Crl.P.No.4828 of 2026 has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused No.1 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.82 of 2026. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.4823 and 4828 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 4. Material averments stemming from the prosecution in Crime No.82 of 2026 are that the complainant was allegedly subjected to continuous physical and mental cruelty by her husband, Accused No.1, who was allegedly instigated by Accused Nos.2 and 3 to eliminate her and contract a second marriage. On 01.06.2026, at about 10:00 p.m., Accused No.1 allegedly assaulted the complainant with a wooden chopping board on her head with an intention to kill her, causing bleeding injuries. When he attempted to assault her again, the complainant's children and nearby neighbours intervened and rescued her. Thereafter, she was shifted to the Government Hospital, Yemmiganur, for treatment. Based on the complaint lodged by the injured, the present crime was registered against the accused for the offences punishable under the relevant provisions of law. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS 5. Sri A Syam Sundar Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioners/Accused No.2 and 3 in Crl.P.No.4823/2026, submits that the Petitioners are innocent, have been falsely implicated, and that the registration of the present FIR is a clear abuse of the process of law. It is contended that the complaint does not disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences or any specific overt acts attributable to the Petitioners, who have been unnecessarily roped into a matrimonial dispute. The learned counsel further submits that the allegations are false, frivolous, and intended only to harass and exert pressure upon the Petitioners. It is also submitted that the Petitioners are law-abiding citizens, 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.4823 and 4828 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 having permanent residence, and are willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the Petitioners be granted anticipatory bail. 6. In Crl.P.No.4828/2026, it is submitted that the Petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, and that the registration of the FIR is a clear abuse of the process of law. It is contended that the complaint does not disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences, particularly under Section 109(1) of „the BNS.,‟ and that the Petitioner has no role whatsoever in the matrimonial dispute between the parties. The learned counsel further submits that the allegations are false, frivolous, and have been made only to harass the Petitioner. It is also submitted that the Petitioner is a law-abiding citizen with a permanent place of residence, is willing to cooperate with the investigation, furnish adequate sureties, and abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is prayed that the Petitioner be granted anticipatory bail. ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: 7. Per contra, Sri A. Sai Rohit, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed granting of pre-arrest bail contending that the investigation is at a nascent stage and the custodial interrogations of the Petitioners are imperative for eliciting material facts. It is submitted that if the Petitioners are granted pre-arrest bail, there is a grave apprehension that they may not cooperate with the investigation and may evade the process of law. It 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.4823 and 4828 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 is further submitted that the accused persons allegedly acted in conspiracy and were involved in creation and use of forged documents for unlawful registration of properties and it is urged that the instant bail application be dismissed. 8. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 9. 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 Petitioners are entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?” ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION: 10. As seen from the record, the specific allegation against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 is that he attacked his wife, the de-facto complainant, with a knife, causing grievous injuries. In view of the specific overt acts attributed to the Petitioner/Accused No.1, it is well settled in law, as enunciated by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab1and Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)2, that the grant of anticipatory bail does not amount to a charter for commission of serious offences, nor does it serve as a cloak of immunity for individuals against whom specific and prima facie cognizable allegations have been levelled. The relief under Section 482 of „the BNSS‟ is intended to safeguard 1 (1980) 2 SCC 565 2 (2020) 5 SCC 1 6 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.4823 and 4828 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 personal liberty, but not to thwart the legitimate course of investigation or to protect those who are prima facie complicit in grave offences involving overt acts. In view of the specific overt acts attributed against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 in Crime No.82 of 2026, this Court is not inclined to enlarge him on pre-arrest bail, as custodial interrogation is required to elicit further facts and circumstances of the case to collect evidence for effective completion of the investigation. Hence, the request for grant of pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.1 is dismissed. Accordingly, Crl.P.Nos.4828 2026 is dismissed. 11. Insofar as the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.82 of 2026 are concerned, they are the brothers-in-law of the de facto complainant. The allegation against them is that they instigated Accused No.1 to do away with the de facto complainant so that he could contract a second marriage. However, the complaint does not disclose any specific instances or dates on which such alleged instigation took place. The allegations against Accused Nos.2 and 3 are omnibus and bald in nature, without attributing any specific overt acts to them. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3, subject to the following conditions. 12. In the result, Crl.P.No.4828 of 2026 is dismissed and Criminal Petition No.4823 of 2026 is allowed with the following stringent conditions: i. In the event of arrest, Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crl.P.No.4823 of 2026 shall be enlarged on bail subject to 7 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.4823 and 4828 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials. ii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crl.P.No.4823 of 2026 shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required. iii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crl.P.No.4823 of 2026 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses. iv. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crl.P.No.4823 of 2026 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned once in a week i.e., on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet. v. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crl.P.No.4823 of 2026 shall not leave the State of Andhra Pradesh without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. vi. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crl.P.No.4823 of 2026 shall surrender their passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If they claim that they do not have passport, they shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Dated: 30.06.2025 KMS Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No 8 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.4823 and 4828 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 83 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NOs: 4823 and 4828 of 2026 Date:30.06.2026 KMS