CRLP/4097/2026 of Jeeva Venkata Ramana Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 7 May 2026

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”) seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner/Accused in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.41 of 2026, dated 07.02.2026, on the file of II Town Police Station, Eluru District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 69 and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”).

2. Heard Sri A. Sreedhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mrs. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State. Perused the material available on record.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the petitioner/accused, who is working in SSB Paramilitary Force in Assam State, developed acquaintance with the de-facto complainant through WhatsApp and subsequently their friendship turned into a love affair. It is alleged that on 21.08.2024, the petitioner came to R.R. Peta, Eluru, and requested the victim to come to a room in Nitya Residency Lodge stating that he intended to discuss certain matters with her. Believing the promise made by the petitioner that he would marry her, the victim allegedly went to the lodge, where the petitioner had sexual intercourse with her. Thereafter, the petitioner continued his relationship with the victim and again, in September, 2025, he allegedly took the victim to the same lodge and had sexual intercourse with her on the assurance of marriage. It is further alleged that whenever the victim insisted for marriage, the petitioner postponed the same on one pretext or another and ultimately refused to marry her. The victim claims to possess audio recordings and chats evidencing the assurance given by the petitioner. Based on the report lodged by the victim, the present crime came to be registered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the allegations are false and fabricated. He submits that though there was acquaintance and love affair between the petitioner and the victim, no physical relationship ever took place between them. He further submits that the victim herself arranged the lodge rooms and avoided taking the petitioner to her parents’ house, which created suspicion in his mind. Upon enquiry, the petitioner allegedly came to know that the victim was maintaining an illicit relationship with her brother-in- law and therefore he decided to discontinue the relationship. It is further submitted that the medical evidence does not support the prosecution case. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Chinnammallipuram, Srikakulam District, and is serving in SSB Paramilitary Force, Assam State, and that his arrest would seriously affect his service career and family reputation. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation and prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the petition contending that the allegations against the petitioner are grave and serious in nature. It is submitted that the petitioner induced the victim into a physical relationship on the false promise of marriage and later refused to marry her. The prosecution further contends that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to ascertain certain facts.

6. Having considered the submissions made by both sides and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that the allegations against the petitioner disclose a prima facie case. The material on record indicates that the petitioner developed intimacy with the victim and allegedly maintained physical relations with her on the assurance of marriage and subsequently refused to marry her. The allegations are serious in nature and the investigation is still in progress. At this stage, this Court is of the opinion that there is every likelihood of the petitioner influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence if enlarged on anticipatory bail.

7. In view of the foregoing reasons, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed __________________________________________ DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date 08.05.2026 KKV

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4097/2026

08.05.2026 KKV