Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8732 (AP)

Pilli Rama Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

CRLP/7150/2026 · 2026-08-23

Y Lakshmana Rao

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010432212026 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: 7150/2026 Between: 1. PILLI RAMA RAO, S/O LATE P VENKATESWARA RAO MALE, AGED 28 YEARSR/O 2-21, GOLLANAPALLI VILLAGE,GANNAVARAM MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT,ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE SHO, AGIRIPALLI PSELURU DISTRICTTHROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTORHIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. GOWTHAM REDDY PUNURU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. 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 Petitioner/Accused No.6 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.7150 of 2026 Dated 24.08.2026 Crime No.66 of 2026 of Agiripalli Police Station, Eluru District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Section 194 of ‘the BNSS’. 2. Sri P. Gowtham Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence. He 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. Hence, it is urged to allow the Criminal Petition. 3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner and submits that the investigation is not yet completed, and some more material witnesses are yet to be examined. It is also submitted that the offence is grave and heinous which cannot be taken a lenient view. 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. 5. On a perusal of the record, it appears that the Petitioner has played a pivotal role in the commission of the offence. He allegedly received an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from Accused No.2 and handed it over to Accused No.5 as supari or consideration for eliminating the deceased. The Petitioner is also alleged to have actively participated in the conspiracy by procuring photographs of the deceased from Facebook. Having regard to the material 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.7150 of 2026 Dated 24.08.2026 available on record, this Court finds no merit in the present petition. Accordingly, the petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. 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:24.08.2026 KMS 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.7150 of 2026 Dated 24.08.2026 73 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7150 of 2026 Date:24.08.2026 KMS