logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 APHC 1807 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Case No : Criminal Petition No. 7813 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
Parties : Goduguchintha Uday Kumar & Another Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Public Prosecutor, Amaravati.
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: D. Purna Chandra Reddy, Advocate. For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor.
Date of Judgment : 16-09-2026
Head Note :-
BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 480 & 483 -
Judgment :-

1. The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 on bail in Crime No.87 of 2026 of Pakala Urban Police Station, Tirupathi District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 80(2), 85, 115(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNS’) and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for brevity, ‘the D.P Act’).

2. Mr.D.Purna Chandra Reddy, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners are innocent of the alleged offences. They have been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the Petitioners are the sole earning members of their respective families and, therefore, their incarceration would cause undue hardship to their dependents. The Petitioners undertake to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is urged to allow the Petitions.

3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioners, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. 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 and urged to dismiss the Petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

5. On perusal of the record, the Petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos.1 and 2 in this case. Accused No.3 is the paternal uncle of petitioner/Accused No.1, who is the husband of the deceased. Accused No.4 is the married elder sister of petitioner/Accused No.1. Petitioner/Accused No.2 is the stepmother of the petitioner/Accused No.1. The Petitioners were arrested on 17.06.2026. They have been in judicial custody for the past 91 days. Substantial portion of the investigation with regard to the alleged role played by the Petitioners concerned is completed. The charge sheet has not yet been filed. The Petitioners are permanent residents of Tirupati District. They have got fixed abode. If the Petitioners are enlarged on bail subject to stringent conditions, there is no likelihood of their absconding, threatening the witnesses, tampering with the evidence, or hampering the further course of investigation. This Court in Crl.P.No.6230 of 2026 vide order dated 07.08.2026 enlarged the Accused Nos.3 and 4 on bail with some stringent conditions. The present petitioners are also standing on the same footing.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court observed that the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 are close relatives of Accused Nos.3 and 4, and the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 17.06.2026. Considering that they have undergone about 91 days of incarceration, that a substantial part of the investigation relating to their alleged role has already been completed, and that they are permanent residents with fixed abode in Tirupati District, the Court was of the view that their release on bail would not likely result in absconding, influencing witnesses, tampering with evidence, or obstructing the investigation. Therefore, it is just and proper to enlarge the Petitioners on bail subject to stringent conditions.

7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following stringent conditions:

                  i. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pakala.

                  ii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 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 Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 shall not leave the limits of the Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned.

                  iv. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence while on bail.

                  v. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer in further investigation of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required.

                  vi. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 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.

                  vii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 shall surrender their passports, if any, to the Investigating Officer. If they claim that they do not have passports, they shall submit affidavits to that effect to the Investigating Officer.
 
  CDJLawJournal