Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Munaga Subba Reddy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 1 August, 2025
i
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAI
FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST ut
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE 'tsgr
: PRESENT: hart-.
THE HONOURABLE
NOURABLE Di€yJusTICE
DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA IRAO
lJf` `
CRIMINAL PETITIO`N NO: 7569 OF 2025 ty^d9#
Between :
\` `rf. ..
Munaga Subba Reddy, S/o.Venkateswara Reddy Aged about 64 Lye+ars,
R/o.Rajakapet, Nidubrolu Village, Ponnur MandaI, Guntur District \#z#
.I. petitioner/Accused No.§
AND
The State OfAndhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Proge6utor, High Court of
t-ap+ of ..
Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati Through S.H.O., Ponnur Rural Police Station
Guntur District. \rf/~
.... Respondent/Cohi6[ainant
\ s3.;
petition under section 482``+of BNSS & 43Lgr of crpc is filed , praying that
in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the criminal
Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused
No.3 on Antj5Pato\fy Bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the
crime No. 90 of2025 of Ponnur Rural Police Station, Guntur District. \dr~» :
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petl-lion and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI
HARINADH NIDAffiANURI Advocate for the Petitioner, Assistant Public
Prosecutor for the respondent and the court made the following.
`
ORDER
Dr. crI.P.No.7569 of 2` Dated 01.08.202_ The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The Criminal Petition has been filed` under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity lthe BNSSJ) by the petit®loner/Accused No.3 for granting Of Pre-arrest bail in connection with crime No.90 of 2025 of Ponnur Rural Police Station, Guntur District, registered for the alleged offenceS Punishable under Sections 308 (2) and 351 (2) read with 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity lthe BNS')
2. The case of the Prosecution iS that On 08.05.2025, the de-facto complainant filed a report before the pol-ICe Stating that he OWned One tractor and that on 23.07.2023, he had borrowed a Sum Of Rs.1,70,000/- from Accused No.1 for agr'lcultural Purposes. Subsequently, the de- facto complainant repaid an amount of Rs.75,000/- and informed Accused No.1 that the remaining amount, along with applicable interest, would be settled shortly. However, despite this assurance, Accused No.1 along with Accused No.2, visited the de-faCtO COmPlainant and allegedly threatened him With dire COnSequenCeS. They attempted to forcibly take possession of the tractor. when the de-facto complainant resisted and refusee!,rtp hand over the tractor, Accused Nos.1 and 2 3 Dr. YLR, I CrI.P.No.7569 of 2025 Dated 01.08.2025 allegedly used criminal force, crea{6d fear, and forcibly took the 'tractor away from him. subsequent {o the above incident and t€u£lodging of the report, it is .reported that the de-facto complainant died by committing suicide on 12.05.2025.
3. Sri N.Har'lnadh, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged 'offence and has been falsely implicated by the police. lt is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, he is ready to abide any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and it is urged to grant pre-arrest bail to, the petitioner.
4. Per confra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant `of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still undervay and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitI'Oner iS released On Pre-arrest bail, there iS a Strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering _the ongoing investigation. and evading the process of law. ln vI'eW Of the foregoing, it iS urged that the petition be dismissed.
5. Heard th`al=6arned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perusec! the record.
Dr. Crl.P.No.7569 of 2` Dated 01.O8.202`l
6. As seen from the record, there is no specific allegation against the Petitioner/Accused No.3 in the FIR lodged by the de-facto complainant on 08.05.2025. Later, the de-facto complaI'nant resorted tO the extreme step of committing suicide by consuming pesticides. The statement of the de-facto complal'nant was not recorded by the lnves{igatl-ng officer during his treatment for about three days pursuant to the consumption of Pesticides. The statements given by L.W.10 d.isclose that the petitl'oner and Accused Nos.1 and _2 pressurized the de-facto complainant/deceased to repay the amount, otherwI'Se tO commit suicide. Based on the statement of L.W.10, the petitioner was arrayed as I Accused No.3 in this case. Accused Nos.1 and 2 have already been enlarged on pre-arrest bail by the learned Single Judge of this court I'n Crl.P.No.6190 of 2025, vide order dated o3.07.2025.
7. Considering the gravity and nature of the allegations leveled against the petitioner/Accused No.3, his alleged role played in this case, this Court deems I't fit tO grant Pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/Accused No.3.
8. ln the result, the criminal Petition I-s allowed with the following cond]'tions:
?-_-_Tin 5 Dr-YLR, J Crl.P.No.7569 of 2025 / Dated O1.08.2O25 +i= I i. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner/Accused No.3 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials; ii. The petition;r/Accused No.3 shall make himself available for investigation as and when required; iii. The petitioner/Accused No.3 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses;
iv. The petitioner/Accused No.3 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned once in a week i.e., on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.OO p:m., till fiI'lng of the charge sheet.
v. The petitioner/Accused No.3 shall not leave the district limits without the express permission from the Station Hr`l leO r)ffiCer concerned.
sD/-M_P
ASSISTANT
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION
To, y
1. The S.H.a., Ponnur Rural Police Station Guntur District. (by RPAD)
2. One CC to SRl. HARINADH NIDLeA~wiANURI Advocate [OPUC]
3. Two CCs to PuBLICj', PROSECbJ'-+oR, High Court of Andhra pradesh.\ouT\ `+--
4. One spat-e COPY €`d+-f+-` HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED:01 /08/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.7569 of 2025 ALLOWED