Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Annamalai Palani Swami vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 July, 2025
lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY,
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE DRJUSTICEY| LAKSHMANA RAO ¢''J` A"` `--''l``
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7405 OF 2025
Between:
Annamalai Palani Swami, S/o. Annamalai, aged about 52 years, R/o.
Kandigal Village, Villupuram District, Tamilnadu State.
Petitioner/Accused No.1
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court
of Andhra Pradesh, at Amaravati through Station House Officer,
RSASTF Police station. Tirupati, Chittoor District.
Respondent/Complainant
Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS., is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to release the petitioners/ A-1 on Bail in connection with RSS SC No. 388 of 2022 on the file of Additional District & Sessions Judge for Trial of Red Sanders Smuggling Cases, Tirupathi.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri. SRINIVASU L, Advocate for the Petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent;
The Court made the following ORDER:
APHCO10358092025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3521] EELE (Special Original Jurjsdjction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO £B!niMINAL PET±±±gNL±LO : 7405Ji2Q2±[ Between:
ANNAMALAI PALANI SWAMI, S/O. ANNAMALAl, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. KANDIGAL VILLAGE, VILLUPURAM DISTRICT, TAMILNADU STATE.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh, a{ Amaravati through station House Officer, RSASTF Police station. Tirupati, Chittoor District.
u.RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 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 may be pleased to release the Petitioners/ A- 1 on Bail in connection with RSS SC N6. 388 of 2022 on the file of Additional DI-Strict & Sessions Judge for Trial of Red Sanders Smuggling Cases, Tirupathi and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
SRINIVASU L Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER:
The Criminal Petition has been filed under sections 480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraks`.±a Sanhi{a, 2023 (for brevity fthe BNSS'), seeking to L` _ __ _ _ 2 Dr.YLR,J CRL. P. No_7405/2025 enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail in RSS SC No.388 of 2022 of Sidhout Range Police Station, Tirupathi .District registered against the petitio,ner/Accused Not.1 herein for the offence punishable under Sections 20(1)(c)(ii)(iii)(iv)(vi)(x), 29 (2) b and (4) a of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967 (for short {the APFA Act'), re;d with Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Sandal wood and Red Sanders wood Possession Rules, 1989 and under I-
section 379 read with 109 of Indian Penal Code,1860.
2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that, on 28.ll.2017 at about ll :00 a.m., the Forest Beat Officers along with his staff heard some noise was fr~_._I_.. coming from inside the forest and observed ten persons dressing Red Sander logs with axes. Immediately, the police surrollnded and caught Accused No.1 while othe other absconded from the scene of offence. The forest officials searched in presence of Accused No..1 and found 4 Red Sander logs. Hence, a case was registered.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.
4. Mr. Srinivasulu L, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the , petitioner has not committed any offence; petitioner was falsely implicated by the police in the crime; petitioner is the sole breadwinner; petitl-oner would abide,by any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to allow the petition.
E=-
c~/ 3 Dr.YLR,J CRL.P. No.7405/2025
5. Perconfra, Ms. P. Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that the petI-tiOner iS habitual offender, some more material witnesses have to be examined; investigation is not completed; if the petitioner is enlarged on baI'I, he would not be available for the investI'gatiOn and he would escape from the clutches of law; and urged to dismiss the bail petition.
6. As seen from the record, the petitioner had not appeared before the learned Trial Court at relevant point of time. The learned Trial Court was constrained to issue Non-Bailable Warrant against the petitioner. on coming to know about the Non-Bailable Warrant, the petitioner himself appeared befo+e the learned Trial Court and moved an applicatI-On under Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short fthe Cr.P.C),1973, for recall of the Non-Bailable Warrant, whereas the leamed Trial Court did not incline to recall the Non-Bailable Warrant, dismiss®'ed that application and remanded the petitioner to the judicial custody on 18.06.2025, ever since he has been in the judicial custodyforthe past40 days. It appears that the learned Trial Court has not yet issued the schedule. The petitioner was absent on o1.05.2025. The learned Trial Court was constrained to issue Non-Bailable Warrant for three earlier occasions.
7. ln view of the fact that the trial would take considerable length of time and the` petitioner himself appeared before the learned Trial Court and moved an application under Section 70(2) of fthe Cr:P.C', if the petitioner I'S enlarged on bail, the I'ntereSt Of juStiCe would be subserved. Additionally, it is submitted I-
4Dr.YLR,J CRL. P. No.7405/2025 that the petitioner has been suffering from hearty ailment, although no document is filed. The age of the petitioner is about 52 years.
8. ConsI-derI-ng all the above aspects, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitI-Oner On bail wl-th the following strI'ngent COnditiOnS:
i. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subJ'eCt tO he executing a bond tor a Sum Of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge for Trial of Red Sanders Smuggling Cases, Tl-rupati.
ii. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the learned Additional DI'StriCt & Sessions Judge for Trial of Red qSanders Smuggling Cases, Tirupati and cooperate with the trial. Failure to appear before the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge for Trial of Red Sanders Smuggling Cases, Tirupati, by the petitioner at relevant point of time, the learned Trial Court may proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.
SD/-G.HELANAIDU] ASSISTAjgrISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY//
--i+=+!tE=:==;-
/ To,
1. The Additional District & Sessions Judge for Trial of Red Sanders Smuggling Cases, Tirupathi.
2. The Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Tirupati..
3. The Station House Officer, RSASTF Police station, Tirupati, Chittoor District.
4. One CC to Sri. SRINIVASU L, Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. [OUT]
6. One spare copy JSS HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED : 23/07/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.NoI7405 of 2025 ALLOWED CN F= FEE= LJrTJTJI •# #i #ael