Date of reserved for orders : Nil Date of pronouncement : 02.07.2026 Date of uploading : 07.07.2026 APHC010318702026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE 2nd DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5097/2026 Between: 1. CHADAMALA LAKSHMAIAH, S/O LATE BAKKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49YEARS. RESIDENT OF 2-3A-6-A1-1, JANDLAVARAM VILLAGE,NANDYALAMPETA,MYDUKUR MANDAL, YSR CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRAPRADESH. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by its PublicProsecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, representingthe Station House Officer, Gurramkonda Police Station, AnnamayyaDistrict. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SRINIVASU L 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.7 on bail in Crime No.15 of 2015 of Gurramkonda Police Station, now pending in RSS PRC No.286 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class-cum-Special Court for Trial of Cases Relating to Red Sanders Smuggling, Tirupati, offences punishable under Sections registered for the 20(1)(c)(ii)(iii)(iv)(x) of the A.P. Forest Act, 1967, Rules 3 and 4 of the A.P. Sandal Wood and Red Sandal Wood Transit Rules, 1969, Section 29 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, Sections 55(2) and 58 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, Sections 379, 353, 307, 120-B read with Section 34 IPC and Section 30 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. Mr.L.Srinivasu, learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. He 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, he prays that the present petition be allowed. 4. Per contra, contra, Mr.K.Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, submits that the investigation is not yet completed and that some more material witnesses are yet to be examined. It is further submitted that there 3 are three similar red sanders offences registered against the Petitioner. Hence, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 5. On perusal of the record, the instant crime was registered way back in the year 2015. It is alleged that the Petitioner/Accused No.7 has been absconding for the past 11 years. The Petitioner was arrested on 04.06.2026. He has been in judicial custody for the past 28 days. An absconding charge sheet was filed in the case, and the trial is proceeding against Accused Nos.1 to 6. The police have not yet filed the statutory charge sheet against the Petitioner. The red sanders involved in this case consist of 7 logs. Further, there are three similar red sanders offences registered against the Petitioner. In his application, the Petitioner has not disclosed the details of his previous criminal antecedents. 6. In this regard, it is apposite to refer to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Zeba Khan v. State of U.P.,1, wherein, at Paragraph Nos. 47 and 48, it was observed that bail applications are often considered on the basis of prima facie material placed before the Court at different stages of the proceedings. The Court held that non-disclosure of material facts, such as criminal antecedents, prior bail rejections, custody period, and the stage of trial, may result in an erroneous grant or refusal of bail. It was further held that every bail applicant is under an obligation to disclose all material particulars, including criminal antecedents and any coercive processes pending against him, duly supported by an affidavit. Such disclosure is necessary to ensure transparency, uniformity, and integrity in bail adjudication. 1 2026 SCC Online 188 4 7. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Zeba Khan supra, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the Petitioner on bail at this juncture. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 8. 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:02.07.2026 PRA Whether the order is: Speaking Reasoned Reportable Non-reportable 5 137 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5097 of 2026 Date: 02.07.2026 PRA