CRLP/2898/2026 of Chidkala Narayanamurthi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 22 April 2026

COMMON ORDER:

Since the subject matter of these Criminal Petitions is one and the same, at the request of the learned counsel on both sides, these petitions are heard together and passed the following common order.

2. This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), by the petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5,7,8,9,12,13 and 14 seeking grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.24 of 2026 on the file of Kothananduru Police Station, Kakinada District. The said crime is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 103(1), 109(1) read with 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”).

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the de-facto complainant, who belongs to a political party, along with others, after attending birthday celebrations on 16.01.2026 at about 8:30 PM near the Village Secretariat, was returning to their respective houses. When they reached near the house of Accused No.1, the petitioners along with other persons allegedly attacked them with knives, iron rods, and sticks. In the said incident, one Lalam Bangarayya died due to stab injuries. It is further alleged that Accused persons attacked injured witness Chintakayala Srirammurthy, and Accused No.3 stabbed him on his face. The de-facto complainant was also assaulted with sticks and iron rods by all the accused. Hence, the case.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners/Accused Nos.3, 5,7,8,9,12,13 and 14 and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that due to political rivalry, a false case has been foisted against the petitioners. It is contended that though one person died and others sustained injuries in the alleged incident, there are no specific allegations connecting the present petitioners with the death of the deceased. Accused No.11 is a Government Employee working as Branch Post Master and the accused No.10 is a student. Their role is limited to an alleged attack on injured witness No.2 (L.W.1), and no overt acts are attributed to them in respect of the deceased. It is further submitted that the petitioners were arrested on 20.01.2026 and have been in judicial custody since then. The learned counsel also submits that, in fact, the petitioners were attacked by the de facto complainant and his associates, who trespassed into their house, caused damage to property, and inflicted injuries on them. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are law-abiding citizens and are willing to furnish adequate sureties. Hence, it is prayed that they be enlarged on bail.

6. Per contra, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail application, contending that the investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed. It is further submitted that there is prevailing law and order tension in the village due to the incident. She would further submit that

Accused Nos.5 and 8 have criminal antecedents. She further expressed apprehension that if the petitioners are released on bail, they may tamper with evidence, threaten witnesses, and there is a likelihood of their absconding.

7. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel and on perusal of the material available on record. The allegations against the petitioners disclose their active participation in the incident wherein one person lost his life and another sustained injuries. Though it is contended that there are no specific overt acts attributed to the petitioners in causing the death of the deceased, the material prima facie indicates their involvement in the attack on the injured witness. The offence alleged is grave in nature and arose out of political rivalry, which appears to have created tension in the locality. Further, the apprehension expressed by the prosecution regarding the possibility of the petitioners influencing witnesses, tampering with evidence, and causing disturbance to law and order cannot be brushed aside at this stage, this Court is not inclined to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioners for grant of bail at this stage.

8. Accordingly, these Criminal Petitions are dismissed.

__________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 23.04.2026. KKV

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2898 and 2890 of 2026 Dt.23.04.2026

KKV

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATI MAIN CASE NO.: CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2898 and 2890 of 2026 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No. Date

ORDER

OFFICE NOTE

23.04.2026

Dr.VJP,J

These Criminal Petition are dismissed.

(Vide separate common Order) _________ Dr.VJP, J KKV