(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 the prays Petitioner/Accused No. 3 on bail in connection with Crime No. 08 of 2026 on the file of the Srikalahasti II Town Police Station, Tirupathi District in the interest of justice and pass)

1. This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the Petitioner/A.3, seeking bail, in Crime No.08 of 2026 of Srikalahasti II Town Police Station, Tirupati District.

2. A case has been registered against the Petitioner/A.3 herein and other accused for the offences punishable under Section 351(2), 126(2), 109(1) r/w. 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’).

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 11.01.2026 at about 10:28 A.M. at Kummari Street, Bahadurpet, Srikalahasti Town, and the report was lodged on 20.01.2026 at 11:00 A.M. by the complainant, Shaik Ameenulla. The complainant alleged that, owing to prior disputes relating to Narthaki Bar and his refusal to support A-1 in financial disputes, A-1 had been threatening him with dire consequences. It is alleged that on 11.01.2026, while the complainant was proceeding in his car along with his wife and children, A-1 wrongfully restrained and threatened him, and thereafter, along with A-2 and A-3, assaulted and attempted to obstruct him. It is further alleged that A-1 poured petrol on the complainant’s car and threatened to burn the family. On the intervention of nearby persons and after a 100 call was made, the accused allegedly fled from the scene. The complainant stated that, due to fear and subsequent medical treatment of his wife, the report was lodged with delay.

4. Sri C. Nageshwara Rao, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri V. Uday Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the de facto complainant, with mala fide intention to harass the accused, lodged a false and fabricated complaint containing baseless allegations. A bare perusal of the report shows that though the alleged incident occurred on 11.01.2026 at 10:30 A.M., the complaint was lodged only on 20.01.2026, after an unexplained delay of nine days, which itself casts serious doubt on the veracity of the allegations. It is further submitted that the allegations are an afterthought, deliberately made to falsely implicate the petitioner and his family members. The petitioner had no connection with the alleged disputes or transactions between the de facto complainant and Accused No.1 and was implicated solely for being his son. It is submitted that the petitioner was falsely arrayed as Accused No.3 without any basis. Even the wife of Accused No.1 was implicated through omnibus allegations to give gravity to the case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. It is submitted that Accused Nos.1 and 2 filed Crl.M.P. No.14 of 2026 before the learned XII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srikalahasti, and the same was allowed by order dated 24.02.2026. It is submitted that the petitioner earlier filed Crl.P. No.1777 of 2026 before this Court, which was disposed of on 12.03.2026 permitting him to surrender and seek regular bail. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner surrendered on 05.05.2026 and was remanded to judicial custody. Thereafter, his regular bail application in Crl.M.P. No.125 of 2026 was dismissed on 07.05.2026. It is further submitted that substantial investigation has since been completed and material witnesses have been examined. Continued detention of the petitioner serves no purpose, especially when trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future. The petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and there is no possibility of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the Criminal Petition, contending that the investigation is still pending and some more witnesses are yet to be examined and accordingly prayed for dismissal of the Criminal Petition.

6. Heard learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner/A.3 and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the Respondent/State.

7. Perused the material available on record.

8. Though serious allegations are made against the petitioner, it is noticed that the alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 11.01.2026, whereas the complaint came to be lodged on 20.01.2026, after a considerable delay. The specific role attributed to the petitioner is also a matter to be established during the course of trial.

9. This Court further notes the submission that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and that Accused Nos.1 and 2 have already been granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that substantial investigation has been completed and material witnesses have already been examined. Therefore, the continued incarceration of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of further investigation. Further, no material has been placed before this Court to show that the petitioner is likely to abscond or tamper with the prosecution evidence if enlarged on bail.

10. Having regard to the allegations in the complaint, the contents of the case diary, and the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on regular bail, subject to the following conditions.

                  (a) The petitioner/A.3 shall be released on bail on executing 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 Additional Junior Civil Judge, Srikalahasti.

                  (b) On release, the petitioner/A.3 shall appear before the Investigating Officer once in a week i.e., on every Sunday between 10.00 AM and 1.00 PM for three (03) months or till filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier.

                  (c) The petitioner 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

                  (d) The petitioner shall not indulge in similar acts of crime.

                  (e) The petitioner shall scrupulously comply with the above conditions, and breach of any of them will be viewed seriously. The Prosecution is at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the bail.

11. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

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