Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4052 (AP)

Guduri Vinod Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

CRLP/4728/2026 · 2026-06-28

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : 29.06.2026 Date of uploading : APHC010295372026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE 29th DAY OF JUNE 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4728/2026 Between: 1. GUDURI VINOD KUMAR, S/O. ISSACKAGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O. VISHWANADHAPURAM,ABM COMPOUND, PODILI TOWN AND MANDAL,MARKAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by the Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi,Through S.H.O. of Podili Police Station,Prakasam District. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. MADHAVA RAO NALLURI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail in Crime No.169 of 2025 of Podili Police Station, Prakasam District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.2 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 337, 338, 339 and 341(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNS’). 2. Mr. Madhava Rao Nalluri, learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the Petitioner has not committed any offence. He is a law-abiding citizen. He has got fixed abode. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions that this Court may impose while granting bail. Therefore, it is prayed that the present petition be allowed. 3. Per contra, Mr. P. Somayaji, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner. It is submitted that the investigation is not yet complete and that some more witnesses are yet to be examined. Hence, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On perusal of the record, the Petitioner is working as a Radiologist in the Primary Health Centre, Santhanuthalapadu Village. A case in Cr.No.47 of 3 2026 has also been registered against the Petitioner for the alleged offence of cheating. So far, only six witnesses have been examined. Accused No.1 was enlarged on bail on 07.02.2026. The role of the Petitioner came to light based on the confession of Accused No.1 recorded on 12.11.2025. The Petitioner was arrested on 20.04.2026. He has been in judicial custody for the past 70 days. 6. The allegation against the Petitioner is that Accused No.1 approached him to obtain a Medical Certificate. The Petitioner stated that it was not possible to procure such a certificate and advised Accused No.1 to fabricate and forge a medical certificate by using a fake seal and stamp, for which he demanded Rs.1,000/-. Accused No.1 paid the said amount. Accused Nos.1 and 2, with dishonest intention, fabricated a Medical Certificate purportedly issued by Dr. M. Durga Prasad, Assistant Professor of General Medicine, GGH, Ongole, by forging his signature, and presented it as genuine for the purpose of deceiving the Presiding Officer to secure salary and escape departmental proceedings. 7. The investigation is at progressive stage, and some more material witnesses are yet to be examined. Substantial portion of the investigation is not completed. Therefore, the request of the Petitioner for enlargement on bail is not found convincing or reasonable at this juncture. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the pendency of the investigation, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the 4 Petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail at this juncture. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 9. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date:29.06.2026 PRA Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No 5 56 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4728 of 2026 Date: 29.06.2026 PRA