Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/3008/2026 of Bheemavarapu Venkatappa Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 23 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3008/2026 Between: 1. BHEEMAVARAPU VENKATAPPA REDDY, S/O. B. DUGGI
APHC010200422026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3008/2026
Between:
1. BHEEMAVARAPU VENKATAPPA REDDY, S/O. B. DUGGI REDDY
AGED
YEARS,
R/O.D.NO.22-12-35,
ALI
BEIG
STREET,
GOVERNORPET, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by the Station House Officer, GovernorpetPolice Station, Rep through the Public Prosecutor, High Court of AndhraPradesh At Amaravati, High Court Buildings, Amaravati, Guntur District.
...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 Courtmay be pleased to grant bail to the petitioner/accused no.2 in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.25/2026 on the file of the Governorpet Police Station, Tirupathi for offences punishable u/s. 316(2), 318(4), 338, 351(1) r/w 3(5) of the Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 and 175 (3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 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 may be pleased to direct the respondent not to
take any coercive steps against the petitioner/accused no.2 in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.25/2026 on the file of the Governorpet Police Station, Tirupathi for offences punishable u/s. 316(2), 318(4), 338, 351(1) r/w 3(5) of the Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 and 175 (3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. KILARU NITHIN KRISHNA
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3008 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order:
The Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’), by the petitioner/Accused No.2 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.25 of 2026 of Governorpet Police Station, NTR Commissionerate, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 351(1) read with 3(5) of BNS.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the defacto complainant lodged a report on 11.04.2026 at about 19:30 hours stating that he, along with LWs.2 and 3, was induced by Accused Nos.1 and 2 by making deceitful representations to join a business of wood beading and plywood under the name and style of VR and Dhana Lakshmi Enterprises. It is alleged that Accused No.1 got bank accounts opened in the names of the complainant and others by forging their signatures at Karur Vysya Bank, Governorpet Branch, Vijayawada, and thereby induced the complainant to invest an amount of Rs.25,00,000/-, along with investments from others, in the said business. Thereafter, the accused allegedly cheated the complainant and others.
3. Heard Sri Kilaru Nithin Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State. Perused the record.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the crime and is in no way connected with the alleged offence. It is contended that the petitioner is the father of Accused No.1 and that there are no specific allegations attributing any overt acts to him. It is further contended that the witnesses are close associates and family members of the defacto complainant and, in collusion, have falsely implicated the petitioner. Hence, it is prayed that the petitioner be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed granting of pre-arrest bail contending that the investigation is at a nascent stage and if the Petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail, there is a grave apprehension that he may not cooperate with the investigation and may evade the process of law. The prosecution also apprehends that the Petitioner may influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, thereby obstructing the fair and impartial investigation. Finally, it is prayed that the instant bail application be dismissed.
6. Upon consideration of the material on record, it is evident that the present petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking grant of pre-arrest bail without first approaching the learned Sessions Judge concerned. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that such a course is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Mohammed Rasa C v. State of Kerala and Another, wherein it was held that ordinarily an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. should first be filed before the Sessions Court, and only thereafter, in the event of denial, the High Court may be approached, except in exceptional circumstances.
7. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition at this stage. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner/Accused No.2 to approach the learned Sessions Judge concerned and file an appropriate application for grant of anticipatory bail within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that any observations made herein shall not influence the learned Sessions Judge in considering the matter on its own merits and in accordance with law.
8. Until such time, the Investigating Officer is directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner/Accused No.2.
9. With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.
As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
________________________________________
Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Date: 24.04.2026 ARB
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3008 of 2026
Date: 24.04.2026
ARB