1 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4770 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : Date of uploading : APHC010302552026 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 NO: 4770/2026 Between: 1. B MALLIKA, S.I.B.AKKULAPPA,AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE,R/O.D.NO. 1 -51, KODAVANDLAPALLI,MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 2. D EESWARAMMA, ,S/O.D.PULLAPPA,AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE,R/O.D.NO. 1-50, KODAVANDLAPALLI,MUDIGUBBA MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 3. D RAJESH, S/O.D.NARAYANA,AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE,R/O.D.NO. 15-35, THIPPAYAGARIPALLI,REDDIPALLI, ANANTHAPUR-5115501. 4. GORAVA PULLAPPA, S/O.NARAYANA.AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE,R/O.GANGIREDDYPALLI VILLAGE, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH SHO, MUDIGUBBA POLICE STATION,SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTORAT HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI. 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4770 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 2. PALLE PEDDAKKA ALIAS PAPIREDDY PEDDAKKA, W/O.P.CHENDRAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,R/O.KONDAVANDLAPALLE VILLAGE, MUDIGUBBA MANDAL,SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT NOW RESIDING AT POOLETIPALLI VILLAGE,SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. B ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNSS‟) by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.83 of 2024 of Mudigubba Police Station, Sri Satya Sai District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 463, 464, 467, 468 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity „the I.P.C‟) and Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity „the Cr.P.C‟). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. Material averments stemming from the prosecution are that the accused, in furtherance of their common intention, allegedly created and used forged documents to deprive the de-facto complainant of her lawful rights over 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4770 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 the subject agricultural land. It is alleged that Accused No.1 executed a registered sale deed in favour of Accused No.2 by fabricating documents with the intention of grabbing the property and causing wrongful loss to the complainant. Aggrieved thereby, the complainant approached the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kadiri, who directed registration of the case. Pursuant to the said direction, the police registered the present crime and took up investigation. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS 3. Sri B. Abhay Siddhanth, learned Counsel for the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 submits that the dispute is purely civil in nature arising out of rival claims over immovable property, and that the pending civil suit has been given a criminal colour by lodging the present complaint. It is submitted that the execution of a registered sale deed, mutation of revenue records, and issuance of pattadar passbook negate the allegations of forgery, and that the essential ingredients of the offences under Sections 463, 464, 467, 468 and 420 of „the IPC.,‟ are not made out. The learned counsel further argued that no specific overt acts are attributed to the Petitioners, who have no criminal antecedents, are permanent residents, and are willing to cooperate with the investigation. Placing reliance on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Joseph Salvaraj v. State of Gujarat, Mohammed Ibrahim v. State of Bihar, and Devendra v. State of U.P., it is contended that continuation of the criminal 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4770 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Therefore, the Petitioners seek the relief of anticipatory bail. ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: 4. 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 interrogation 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 and it is prayed that the instant bail application be dismissed. 5. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 6. 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: 7. As seen from the record, prior to filing the private complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate, the de-facto complainant had instituted O.S. No.846 of 2023 in November, 2023, seeking a declaration of title and consequential permanent injunction against the Petitioners. The de-facto complainant claims that her father-in-law purchased the subject property in the year 1975. On the 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4770 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 other hand, it is the case of the accused that Accused No.1 purchased the property from the complainant's father-in-law in the year 1994. Thereafter, in the year 2020, Accused No.1 executed a registered sale deed in favour of Accused No.2, and Accused Nos.3 and 4 attested the said sale deed as witnesses. 8. Having regard to the facts circumstances of the case and fact that the civil litigation is pending in between the de-facto complainant and the accused, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4. 9. In the result, Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. In the event of arrest, Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 shall be enlarged on bail subject to 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.1 to 4 shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required. iii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses. iv. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 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. 6 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4770 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 v. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 shall not leave the State of Andhra Pradesh without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. vi. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 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 7 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.4770 of 2026 Dated 30.06.2026 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4770/2026 Date: 30.06.2026 KMS