Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/1015/2026 of Kunkala Srihari Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 29 March 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1015/2026 Between: 1. KUNKALA SRIHARI, S/O DASARADHA
APHC010066782026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1015/2026
Between:
1. KUNKALA SRIHARI, S/O DASARADHA RAMMAIAH,AGED ABOUT 65
YEARS, R/O 216,22 WARD, PRASANTH NAGAR,DEVANAHALLI, BANGALORE RURAL,KARNATAKA.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA
PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI
2. UDAYAGIRI SRINIVASULU, S/O VENKATESWARULU,AGED ABOUT
51 YEARS, OCC S.R.O, KOWUR,NELLORE DISTRICT, NELLORE,
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
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 pleased to direct the Kovvuru Police Station, Nellore to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.
156 of 2025 on the file of Kovvuru Police Station, Nellore and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. T D PANI KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1015 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 has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioner/Accused No.1 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.156 of 2025 of Kovvuru Police Station, Nellore District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 467 r/w 34 of IPC.
2. Heard Mr.T.D.Phani KUmar, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.
3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that prior to 27.10.2014 at S.R.O. Office, Kovvuru, accused Nos.1 to 5 with dishonest intention, grabbed the land an extent of Ac.0.50 cents belongs to the Vijay B.Muthgi and Sailaja Vijay B Muthgi situated at Srikolanu Village of Annasamudrampet Mandal, by creating fake and forged death certificate of land owners and their pan cards and using them, they fabricated fake G.P.A. and registered the same on accused No.2 at S.R.O. Office, Kovvur vide document No.2145/2014, dated 27.10.2014, and thereby cheated the Sub-Registrar Office Officials. After completion of departmental enquiry in this issue, as per the orders of higher authorities, the present S.R.O., Kovvuru i.e., informant gave report to the police and police registered the cases in Crime No.156 of 2025.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner herein is Accused No.1 and that no specific overt acts are attributed to him in the present matter. It is further submitted that the investigation might have been completed. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the police officials.
5. Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that the investigation is at nascent stage. She would further submit that there is a prima-facie evidence to establish the role of the petitioner in commission of the offence. In addition to that subsequent to registration of the present case, the petitioner herein/accused No.1 and accused No.2 cancelled the registered sale deed said to have been executed by accused No.1 in favour of accused No.2 in 2014. Hence, if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail there is every likelihood to tamper the evidence and hamper the ongoing investigation and she finally prays for dismissal of the petition.
6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material on record, the request of the petitioner cannot be considered at this juncture, since the petitioner has failed to establish a special case for grant of anticipatory bail. The case diary submitted before this Court by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would disclose prima-facie incriminating material against the petitioner. In addition to that, subsequent to registration of the present case, the petitioner herein/accused No.1 and accused No.2 cancelled the registered sale deed said to have been executed by accused No.1 in favour of accused No.2 in 2014. In that view of the matter, this Court finds no merits in the Criminal Petition for granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Hence, the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed.
7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
___________________________________
DR.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 30.03.2026 S D P
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1015 OF 2026 30.03.2026
W S D P