| |
CDJ 2026 APHC 1110
|
| Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh |
| Case No : Criminal Petition No. 5094 of 2026 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO |
| Parties : Vanaparthi Venkatesu Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, Kadapa |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: N. Siva Reddy, Advocate. For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor. |
| Date of Judgment : 02-07-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 480 & 483 -
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
- Sections 191(2)(3), 118(1) and 109 read with 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
2. Catch Words:
- Bail
- Investigation
- Judicial custody
- Conditions of bail
- Absconding
- Witness examination
3. Summary:
The Criminal Petition under the BNSS seeks bail for two accused in a case registered under the BNS. The petitioners claim innocence and have been in custody for 83 days, while the prosecution argues that the investigation is ongoing and the accused may abscond. The court examined the allegations: the first accused allegedly inflicted grave injuries with a knife, and the second accused allegedly caused simple injuries with hands and sticks. Considering the seriousness of the first accusation and the pending investigation, bail was denied for the first accused. Conversely, the investigation for the second accused is complete, and the alleged offense is less severe; therefore, bail was granted subject to stringent conditions. The petition is partially allowed.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
1. The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner Nos.1 and 2/Accused Nos.2 and 4 on bail in Crime No.32 of 2026 of Kadapa Taluk U/G Police Station, Kadapa District, registered against the Petitioner Nos.1 and 2/Accused Nos.2 and 4 herein for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2)(3), 118(1) and 109 read with 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’).
2. Mr.N.Siva Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioners, submits that the Petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated by the police. He further submits that the Petitioners were arrested on 10.04.2026. They have been in judicial custody for the past 83 days. The material objects were seized during the course of investigation, and substantial portion of the investigation has already been completed. The Petitioners undertake 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 Petitioners. He submits that the investigation is still at a nascent stage and several material witnesses remain to be examined, as only twelve witnesses have been examined so far. It is contended that if the Petitioners are released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing submissions, 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. On perusal of the record, the allegation against Petitioner No.1/Accused No.2 is that he shared a common intention and stabbed LW.1 with a knife, thereby causing grave injuries. The allegation against Petitioner No.2/Accused No.4 is that he, along with another accused, assaulted LW.1 with hands and sticks, thereby causing simple injuries. LW.1 and LW.3 are the victims of the offence.
6. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against Petitioner No.1/Accused No.2, and in view of the pendency of investigation, this Court is not inclined to enlarge Petitioner No.1/Accused No.2 on bail at this juncture. Accordingly, the petition, insofar as it relates to Petitioner No.1/Accused No.2, is dismissed.
7. However, the allegations against Petitioner No.2/Accused No.4, when compared to those against Petitioner No.1/Accused No.2, are milder in nature. The investigation with regard to those allegations has been completed. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge Petitioner No.2/Accused No.4 on bail, subject to the following stringent conditions.
i. The Petitioner No.2/Accused No.4 shall be enlarged on bail subject to him executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kadapa.
ii. The Petitioner No.2/Accused No.4 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till filing of the charge sheet.
iii. The Petitioner No.2/Accused No.4 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned.
iv. The Petitioner No.2/Accused No.4 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future.
v. The Petitioner No.2/Accused No.4 shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required.
vi. The Petitioner No.2/Accused No.4 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. In the result, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed.
|
| |
