(Prayer: 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 release the Petitioner/Accused, on bail in the event of petitioner arrest in connection with Crime No.50 of 2026, on the file of the B Kothakota Urban Police Station, Annamayya District and to pass)

1. The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioner/Accused for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 50 of 2026 of B. Kothakota Urban Police Station, Annamayya District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Section 64(1), read with 62 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 3(2)(va) of SC & ST (POA) Act, 175(3) of ‘the BNSS’.

2. Sri T.V.Jaggi Reddy, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is an innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, therefore, his incarceration would cause undue hardship to his dependents. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is a meritorious student. He is aged about 19 years. The Petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of the foregoing submissions, the learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice.

3. Per contra, Mr.K. Sandeep, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the Petitioner is released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. It is further submitted that in Section 164 of Cr.P.C statements, she reiterated her version as submitted in her complaint to the Police. So far three witnesses were examined. Investigation is not yet completed. In view of the foregoing submissions, it is urged that the petition be dismissed.

4. Mr. Vivekananda Virupaksha, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the Respondent No.2 submits that the Respondent No.2/ victim belongs to Scheduled Tribe Community and she is neighbor of the Petitioner. She is aged about 54 years. The Petitioner tried to commit rape on the victim thrice. There are specific overt acts attributed against the Petitioner. If pre-arrest bail is granted, there is every-likelihood of the Petitioner to commit similar offence after granting pre-arrest bail. Hence urged to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

5. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and Mr. Vivekananda Virupaksha, learned legal aid counsel for the Respondent No.2.

6. Perused the record.

7. The defacto complainant is aged about 54 years and she is a neighbour of the Petitioner. In the complaint of defacto complainant, it is mentioned that the age of the Petitioner is 17 years. Whereas, the age of the Petitioner as seen from the SSC marks memorandum, he attained the age of 18 years as on the date of alleged commission of an offence. Thus, he is not a child in conflict in law. The defacto complainant narrated in her complaint that the Petitioner attempted to commit rape on her thrice, whereas she has given only two instances. There are no details furnished by the Petitioner about the manner of alleged attempt to commit rape. As mentioned supra, the Petitioner is at impressional age of 18 years as on the date of commission of an offence. In her complaint, it is also mentioned that the teacher of the Petitioner had admonished the Petitioner, pursuant to the alleged offence committed by the Petitioner. She also submitted that the Petitioner prostrated the defacto complainant. The Petitioner got marks in his X Class 478, in his intermediate 975 marks and he intended to attend NEET examination.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances, the gravity and nature of the allegations leveled against the Petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioner/ Accused.

9. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions:

               i. In the event of arrest of the Petitioner/Accused he shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials;

               ii. The Petitioner/Accused shall make himself available for investigation as and when required;

               iii. The Petitioner/Accused shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses;

               iv. The Petitioner, till completion of the Trial shall not enter into the Village i.e B. Kothakota without express permission from the jurisdictional Magistrate/ Trial Court.

               v. The Petitioner/Accused shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer.