APHC010405292026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY, THE 11th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6667/2026 Between: 1. BODDEPALLI ARUNA, W/O LATE RAMA RAO AGED ABOUT 60YRS, OCC SUB-REGISTRAR RIMS HOSPITAL ROAD, BALAGA HATCO COLONY, SRIKAKULAM SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Through Station House Officer Srikakulam Rural police station Srikakulam District, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravathi ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. P NAGENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioner/Accused No.13forgranting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.147 of 2026 of Srikakulam RuralPolice Station, Srikakulam District, was registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 447,427, 417, 419, 420, 463, 467, 468, 471 read with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, ‘the I.P.C’). 2. Mr.P.Nagendra Reddy, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and she has been falsely implicated by the Police. The Petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is urged to allow the Criminal Petition. 3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the Petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still at a nascent stage and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is further urged that if the Petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, there is a strong likelihood of her absconding, evading the process of law. Hence, it is urged to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3 5. On perusal of the record, the Petitioner is a female, aged about 60 years, presently working as Sub‑Registrar at Amudalavalasa. The allegation against the Petitioner, who has been arrayed as Accused No.13, is that she processed the sale deed allegedly executed by Accused No.1 in favour of Accused No.5. It is alleged that the Petitioner has committed offences punishable under Sections 120‑B and 467 of ‘the I.P.C’. 6. The de-facto complainant has instituted a suit in O.S.No.15 of 2023 on the file of the learned Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Srikakulam seeking declaration and consequential relief. However, the complainant has suppressed the factum of institution of the said suit in his complaint. The Petitioner, while discharging her official duties as Sub‑Registrar, registered the sale deed executed between Accused No.5 and another accused. 7. It is submitted that the Petitioner was working as Sub‑Registrar, Amudalavalasa, whereas the subject property is situated within the territorial jurisdiction of the Sub‑Registrar Office, Srikakulam. The Petitioner received the documents and processed the registration. After clearance was accorded by the Sub‑Registrar, Srikakulam, the Petitioner released the document. Though the property is situated within the limits of the Sub‑Registrar Office, Srikakulam, under the prevailing rules in force, the document can be presented for registration at any Sub‑Registrar Office within the State of Andhra Pradesh. 4 8. It is pertinent to mention that the Investigating Officer initially issued notice under Section 179 of ‘the BNSS’, treating the Petitioner as a witness. Subsequently, however, the Petitioner was shown as Accused No.13. As stated supra, the Petitioner is a Sub‑Registrar, a Government Servant, and a Gazetted Officer. There is no flight risk. There is no likelihood of tampering with the evidence. She has got fixed abode. 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity and nature of the allegations leveled against the Petitioner/Accused No.13, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/Accused No.13, with some stringent conditions. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. In the event of her arrest, the Petitioner/Accused No.13 shall be enlarged on bail subject to her 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/Accused No.13 shall make herself available for investigation as and when required; iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.13 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. 5 iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.13 shall not leave the limits of the Andhra Pradesh without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned. v. The Petitioner/Accused No.13 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. vi. The Petitioner/Accused No.13 shall surrender her passport, if any, to the Investigating Officer. If she claims that she does not have passport, she shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. _______________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 11.08.2026 PRA 6 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.6667 of 2026 Date:11.08.2026 PRA