Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/1893/2026 of Tatanagari Shiva Shankar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 12 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1893/2026 Between: 1. TATANAGARI SHIVA SHANKAR,, S/O T.CHANDRA SEKHAR,
APHC010123482026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
Between:
1. TATANAGARI SHIVA SHANKAR,, S/O T.CHANDRA SEKHAR, AGED
YEARS
RESIDING
AT
D.NO.L
1-41,
JOGANNAPETA,
ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE
STATE
OF
ANDHRA
PRADESH,
REP.
BY
PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR THROUGH SHO, KADIRI POLICE STATION HIGH
COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI.
...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 Court Pleased to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail in SECTIONS 480 & 483(1) OF BNSS (SECTION 437 & 439 OF Cr.P.C)
praying for enlarging the petitioner on bail in in Crime in FIR No. 293 of 2025
dated 19.08.2025 pending on the file of Police Station, Kadiri, Sri Satya Sai District offences punishable under Sections 127(2), 109(1), 118(1), 115(2)
r/w. 3(5) of the BNS
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
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:
This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, has been filed by the Petitioner herein/Accused No.1, seeking regular bail, in FIR No. 293 of 2025 dated 19.08.2025 pending on the file of Police Station, Kadiri, Sri Satya Sai District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 127(2), 109(1), 118(1), 115(2) r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short “BNS”).
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on the night of 17.08.2025, the accused wrongfully confined and assaulted the complainant near Sree Ayyappa Swamy Temple, Kadiri, due to grudge developed on complainant who is first lover of A1’s wife. They kidnapped him from his house, beat him, and attempted to kill him using a stick and a stone slab, causing injuries. The complainant was rescued by locals and later lodged a complaint on 19.08.2025. Based on the complaint, a case was registered, and Accused Nos. 1 and 4 were arrested in February 2026 and remanded to judicial custody.
3. Heard Sri B.Abhay Siddhanth Mootha, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner/accused No.1 is innocent of the alleged offence and he was falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the allegation made against the petitioner/accused No.1 is that the petitioner/accused No.1 took the defacto complainant accusing him of maintaining objectionable intimacy with his wife. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that after five months of registration of the crime, the petitioner was arrested on 03.02.2026 and since then, he has been in judicial custody. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the defacto complainant did not sustain any injuries and the offence under Sections 127(2), 109(1), 118(1), 115(2) r/w 3(5) of the BNS are not attracted. Coming to the criminal antecedents pending against the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that out of the 8 cases, 3 cases are compounded and 5 cases are pending for consideration. He finally prays to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that the prosecution received the wound certificate, which shows that the injuries are simple in nature. She further submitted that the investigation is still in progress and that there are sufficient ingredients to attract the offence under Section 109 of the BNS. She also stated that there is an independent witness, LW7, who had taken the de facto complainant to the hospital. She finally prays for dismissal of the petition.
6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material on record, as rightly pointed out by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the investigation is still in progress. There is sufficient material to attract the offence under Section 109 of the BNS, and an independent witness (LW7) has supported the complainant. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled for regular bail at this stage.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.
__________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 13.03.2026. UPS
Dt.13.03.2026
UPS