Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7493 (AP)

V R Venkatesh v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

CRLP/6106/2026 · 2026-08-06

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010376332026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY, THE 7th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6106/2026 Between: 1. V R VENKATESH, S/O. VEMURI CHINNAREDDAPPANAIDU,AGED 30 YEARS, R/O. 5-1-5, MOHAN REDDY COLONY, CHANDRAGIRI,VTAC MITTAPALEM, BUCHINAIDUPALLI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, 517502. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI. 2. POTHIREDDY KRISHNA SAI, S/O. VENKATA REDDY, AGED 32YEARS, R/O. 20-5-13/6, SANJAY GANDHI COLONY, TIRUPATI CITY,517501, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, MOBILE 7997111117. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. PALA KARTHI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.6106 of 2026 Dated 07.08.2026 Petitioner/Accused No.1 for grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.147 of 2026 of Alipiri Urban Police Station, Tirupati, Tirupati District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 309(4) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. As seen from the record, this Court, by order dated 10.07.2026 in Crl.P.No.5353 of 2026, dismissed the first bail application. The present application is the second bail application. There is no change in circumstances from the date of dismissal of the first bail application till the filing of the present second bail application. The Petitioner submits that he has a three-year-old child and that his wife is eight months pregnant, with her expected date of delivery being 14.10.2026. However, these circumstances cannot outweigh the gravity of the allegations levelled against the Petitioner at present. The Petitioner can renew his application in the month of October two weeks before delivery of his wife. 4. The Hon’ble Apex Court in G.R. Ananda Babu v. State of Tamil Nadu1 at para No.6 held as under: “6…As a matter of fact, successive anticipatory bail applications ought not to be entertained and more so, when the case diary and the status report, clearly indicated that the accused (Respondent 2) is absconding and not cooperating with the investigation. The specious reason of change in circumstances cannot be invoked for successive anticipatory bail applications, once it is rejected by a speaking order and that too by the same Judge.” 1 (2021) 16 SCC 725 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.6106 of 2026 Dated 07.08.2026 5. There are no merits in this petition. Hence the petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. ________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 07.08.2026 KMS 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.6106 of 2026 Dated 07.08.2026 96 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6106/2026 Dated 07.08.2026 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.6106 of 2026 Dated 07.08.2026 KMS