Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement :06.07.2026 Date of uploading : APHC010302242026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE 6th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4832/2026 Between: 1. N SRINIVASULU ALIAS BSP SRINU, S/O. M. NARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.CASTE SC MALA OCCUPATION BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO.3-79B,HARIJANAWADA JAI BHEEM NAGAR, V.KOTA TOWN 8 MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLICPROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, V.KOTA URBAN POLICE STATION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to enlarge the petitioner/A-3 on regular bail in Crime No.70 of 2026 on the file of V.Kota Urban Police Station, Chittoor District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 118(1) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 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.3 on bail in Crime No.70 of 2026 of V. Kota Police Station, Chittoor District, offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 118(1) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. Mr. Jada Sravan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was arrested on 17.05.2026 and has been in judicial custody for the past 46 days. It is contended that the petitioner’s name is not mentioned in the FIR and that he has been arrayed as Accused No.3 only on the basis of statements of Accused Nos.1 and 2. It is further submitted that the substantial part of the investigation is already completed and the main allegations are directed against Accused Nos.1 and 2, and not against the petitioner. The learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and has not committed any offence, and that he is a law-abiding citizen having a fixed place of residence with deep roots in society. It is also submitted that Accused Nos.1 and 2 have already been enlarged on bail, and therefore the petitioner is entitled to similar relief. It is assured that the petitioner would not evade the process of law and would abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Accordingly, it is prayed that the petitioner be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, Mr. K. Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the bail application contending that the investigation is still at a nascent stage. It is submitted that so far only 17 witnesses have been examined and that the accusation against the petitioner is well founded and there are similar adverse antecedents reported against the petitioner. He further contends that the investigation is not yet completed and that several material witnesses are yet to be examined and if he is enlarged on bail at this stage, there is a likelihood of interference with the investigation and influencing of witnesses. Hence, it is prayed that the bail petition be dismissed .5. On a perusal of the record, the petitioner has been arrayed as Accused No.3. He was arrested on 17.05.2026 and has been in judicial custody for the past 46 days. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Chittoor District and has a fixed place of abode. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner has similar criminal antecedents. However, the petitioner has not disclosed the said antecedents in the present bail application. 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 1 2026 SCC Online 188 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. 7. Further, it is noticed that the investigation is still at nascent stage. So far, only 17 witnesses have been examined, and the material portion of the investigation is yet to be completed. Several crucial witnesses remain to be examined. The record further discloses that the deceased was a journalist working with Andhra Jyothi daily newspaper and that the petitioner is alleged to have played a crucial role in the commission of the offence. It is alleged that the deceased was attacked with knives and was brutally hacked on his vital parts, resulting in his instantaneous death. During the said incident, another witness also sustained bleeding injuries. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations and the stage of the investigation, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief of bail at this stage. 8. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the petitioner 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. 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:06.07.2026 JLSR Whether the order is: Speaking Reasoned Reportable Non-reportable THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4832 of 2026 Date: 06.07.2026 JLSR