logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 APHC 533 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Case No : Criminal Petition No. 2528 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Parties : Manikanta Venkata Lakshmi Versus The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravathi
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: D. Kodandarami Reddy, Advocate. For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor.
Date of Judgment : 09-04-2026
Head Note :-
Criminal Procedure Code - Sections 437/438/439/482 -
Judgment :-

(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/A-3 on bail pending enquiry and trial into Crime No.18/2026 of Mulakalacheruvu Police Station, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh and pass)

1. This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, has been filed by the petitioner herein/Accused No.3, seeking regular bail, in Crime No. 18 of 2026 of Mulakalacheruvu Police Station, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109 (1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short “BNS”).

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 08.02.2026 at about 10:00 am, while the accused Nos. 1 to 3 are ploughing the land, then the defacto complainant and others went there and questioned them, then the accused, with an intention to kill the defacto complainant, his son and grandson, pelted stones, due to which the son of the defacto complainant and grandson sustained injuries and then the neighbours came there and the accused ran away.

3. Heard Sri D.Kodandarami Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this is second bail application filed by the petitioner. The petitioner herein is a woman and has been in judicial custody since 10.02.2026. The petitioner is innocent of the offence alleged against her and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner never participated in the commission of the alleged offence. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 are the sons of the petitioner herein. The dispute pertains to a land boundary dispute between the families. The crucial part of the investigation might have been completed. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the injured has already been discharged from the hospital on 17.02.2026. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the Court. He finally prays to allow the petition.

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that the victim sustained grievous injuries and the victim is not in the hospital now. She would further submit that there are specific allegations attributed against the petitioner and that she is the instigator. She would further submit that this is the 2nd bail application filed before this Court. The earlier bail application was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 13.03.2026 in Crl.P.No.1831 of 2026. She finally prays for dismissal of the petition.

6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material placed on record, the petitioner is a woman and has been in judicial custody since 10.02.2026, and the victims have been discharged from the hospital. The allegation against the petitioner is that she has instigated accused Nos. 1 and 2 to take action against the defacto complainant due to civil disputes. This Court is of the view that this is not the stage to decide the culpability of the petitioner/accused No.3 by accepting the allegations. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the crucial part of the investigation has been completed. In that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to release the petitioner/accused No. 3 on regular bail, subject to the following conditions:

                  i) The petitioner/accused No. 3 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each, to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Thamballapalle, Annamayya District.

                  ii) The petitioner/accused No. 3, shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, once in a week i.e., on every Saturday between 10:00 AM and 05:00 PM, till further orders.

                  iii) The petitioner/accused No. 3 shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and cooperate with the investigation.

                  iv) The petitioner/accused No. 3 shall not directly or indirectly induce, threaten or influence any witness acquainted with the facts of the case.

                  v) The petitioner/accused No. 3 shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.

                  vi) The petitioner/accused No. 3 shall surrender her passports, if any, to the concerned Court. If she claims that she does not have a passport, she shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the concerned Court

7. In the event of violation of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.

8. It is also made clear that the observations made in this order are only for the purpose of deciding the bail application and they shall not be construed as opinion on the merits of the Crime.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed.

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

 
  CDJLawJournal