logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 APHC 1155 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Case No : Criminal Petition No. 4356 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
Parties : Shaik Jabid Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented By Its Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravati & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: G.V. Anand Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor.
Date of Judgment : 07-07-2026
Head Note :-
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Section 85 -
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 Courtleased to direct the 1st respondent/police to grant Anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused in the event of registration of the Crime and in the event of his arrest in connection with Un-Registered Crime No. of 2026 on the file of Disha Women P.S., Visakhapatnam, 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 unregistered Crime of Disha Women Police Station, Visakhapatnam, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Section 85 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 and 4 of Muslim Women Protection of Rights on Marriage Act, 2019.

2. Sri G.V.Anand Kumar, 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. 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. Investigation is not yet completed. In view of the foregoing submissions, it is urged that the petition be dismissed.

4. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.

5. Perused the record.

6. The Petitioner is a dumb and deaf person and working as a Teacher in Children Home for Boys, Eluru. There is no case registered against the Petitioner so far. The father in-law of the Petitioner has lodged a complaint against the Petitioner. The Police have asked the Petitioner to appear for preliminary enquiry for counseling.

7. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Petitioner has not turned to the Police Station for attending preliminary enquiry or counseling.

8. Sri G.V.Anand Kumar, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that since February-2026, the Police calling the Petitioner to Police Station.

9. The remedy of the Petitioner is elsewhere, as of now no case registered against the Petitioner. The apprehension that he would be arrested by the Petitioner is misplaced.

10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
 
  CDJLawJournal