APHC010431612026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE 24th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7137/2026 Between: 1. CHINTHA MEKALA VENKATESH ALIAS VENKATESH, S/O. LATE CHINTHA MEKALA ADENNA,AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION,R/O. JANTHULURU VILLAGE, BUKKARAYA SAMUDRAM MANDAL,ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515701. 2. CHINTHA MEKALA OBILESU ALIAS OBULESU, A3, S/O. LATE CHINTHA MEKALA ADENNA,AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION,R/O. JANTHULURU VILLAGE, BUKKARAYA SAMUDRAM MANDAL,ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515701. 3. CHINTHA UMADEVI ALIAS UMADEVI, W/O. C. RAMACHANDRA, A4 AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE,R/O. JANTHULURU, BUKKARAYA SAMUDRAM VILLAGE,ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515701. 4. CHINTHA MEKALA HEMALATHA ALIAS LATHA, A5, W/O. CHINTHA MEKALA VENKATESH,AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE,R/O. JANTHULURU VILLAGE, BUKKARAYA SAMUDRAM MANDAL,ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515701. 5. CHINTAMEKALA RAMALAXMAMMA ALIAS RAMALAKSHMAMMA, A6, W/O. LATE CHINTHA MEKALA ADENNA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. JANTHULURU VILLAGE,BUKKARAYA SAMUDRAM MANDAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515701. 6. TALARI CHINNA KONDAPPA GARI HIMAJA KUMARI ALIAS KUMARI, A7, S/O. PEDDANNA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. D.NO.6-56, SIVAPURAM,CHAKRAYAPETA, BANDAMEDAPALLI POST,ANANTAPUR DISTRICT - 515701 2 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.7137 of 2026 Dated 24.08.2026 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,High Court at Nelapadu, Amaravati,through the Station House Officer,Bukkaraya Samudram Police StationAnanthapuram District. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): K NARSI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 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, 3 to 7 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.106 of 2026 of Bukkaraya Samudram Police Station, Ananthapuram District, was registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 118(1), 351(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ‘(for brevity ‘the BNS’). 2. Mr. K.Narsi Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners are the innocents of the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated by the police. They are law-abiding citizens. They have not committed any offence. They are the sole breadwinners of the family. The petitioners undertake to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed 3 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.7137 of 2026 Dated 24.08.2026 by this Court. In light of the foregoing submissions, learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice. 3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohit, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioners are released on pre- arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. Hence, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. As seen from the record, there are specific overt acts attributed to the petitioner No.1/Accused No.1, alleging that he caused a grievous injury to the victim, namely, C. Tirumalesh. Accused Nos.2 and 8 were arrested and have already been enlarged on bail by the learned Trial Court concerned. 6. In view of the specific overt acts attributed against the petitioner No.1/Accused No.1, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner No.1/Accused No.1, as it would amount to giving a shield, or protection or license to the petitioner who had allegedly caused severe injuries to the victim, as per the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh 4 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.7137 of 2026 Dated 24.08.2026 Singh Sibbia v. State of Panjab1 and Sushila Aggarwal v. State of (NCT of Delhi)2. 7. 7. There are no specific overt acts attributed to the petitioner Nos.2 to 6/Accused Nos.3 to 7. The allegations against them are bald in nature. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity and nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner Nos.2 to 6/Accused Nos.3 to 7, and the alleged role attributed to them in the present case, this Court deems it appropriate to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner Nos.2 to 6/Accused Nos.3 to 7, subject to the following conditions: i. In the event of their arrest, petitioner Nos.2 to 6/ Accused Nos.3 to 7 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 petitioner Nos.2 to 6/Accused Nos.3 to 7 shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required; iii. The petitioner Nos.2 to 6/Accused Nos.3 to 7 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses 1(1980) 2 SCC 565 (2020) 5 SCC 1 5 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.7137 of 2026 Dated 24.08.2026 iv. The petitioner Nos.2 to 6/Accused Nos.3 to 7 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. v. The petitioner Nos.2 to 6/Accused Nos.3 to 7 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. vi. The petitioner Nos.2 to 6/Accused Nos.3 to 7 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court. 8. Insofar as the allegations against the petitioner No.1/Accused No.1 are concerned, the same are specific in nature. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner No.1/Accused No.1. Hence, the petition insofar as the petitioner No.1/Accused No.1 concerned, is dismissed. The petition insofar as petitioner Nos.2 to 6/Accused Nos.3 to 7 are concerned, is allowed. 9. In the result, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 24.08.2026 RSI 6 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.7137 of 2026 Dated 24.08.2026 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7137 of 2026 Date: 24.08.2026 RSI