(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 enlarge/release the petitioners herein/Accused in the event of arrest on bail in connection with FIR No.17 of 2026 dated 01.04.2026 on the file of Tarlupadu Police Station, Markapuram District and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 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 may be pleased to direct the respondent police not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners in connection with the above crime, and pass)

1. The instant Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [for short, „B.N.S.S‟], is filed on behalf of the petitioners herein/accused, seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.17 of 2026 dated 01.04.2026 on the file of Tarlupadu Police Station, Markapuram District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 108 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”).

2. The prosecution case, in brief, as set out in the complaint lodged by the mother of the deceased, is that her son was in love with a girl named Vaishnavi, and that the accused, who are relatives of the said girl, had taken the deceased to Markapur Town, where they allegedly beat and threatened him. As a result, the deceased was under mental distress and subsequently consumed pesticide. Based on the said allegations, the present crime has been registered.

3. Heard Sri Chilukuri Karthik, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are the cousin brothers of one Vaishnavi, who was allegedly in a relationship with the deceased. It is contended that the allegations made against the petitioners are false and that they never assaulted the deceased at any point of time. At the most, it is alleged that the petitioners had only admonished the deceased for allegedly harassing the said girl in the name of love, which, even if accepted on its face value, would not constitute any offence. Learned counsel would further submit that there are no essential ingredients to attract the offences relating to abetment, instigation, or intentional aid. It is further submitted that the petitioners are ready to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the Court and are willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Learned counsel finally prays to allow the petition.

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioners approached this Court directly seeking anticipatory bail. She would further submit that the investigation is still at nascent stage.

6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petition may be disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the concerned Jurisdictional Court and move an appropriate application.

7. Considering the submissions made, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

However, the petitioners are directed to appear before the concerned jurisdictional Court within a period of four (4) weeks from this day and file an appropriate application. Till such application is filed and a decision is taken thereon by the concerned Court, the respondent/State is directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners.

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