Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/11716/2025 of Sohail Basha Shaik, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 9 March 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11716/2025 Between: 1. SOHAIL BASHA SHAIK,, H NO 11-227/
APHC010607992025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
Between:
1. SOHAIL
BASHA
SHAIK,,
H
NO
11-227/A,
POLAKAMPADU,
TADEPALLI,GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH
2. SHAIK RABIYA, H NO 11-227/A, POLAKMAPADU, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH
3. SHAMMEEM SULTANA SHAIK, R/O 3-609/1B4, NEAR AYYAPPA
SWAMY TEMPLE, UNDAVALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TADEPALLI POLICE STATION, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRDESH.
3. ITI FINANCE LIMITED, LOCATED AT ITI HOUSE, 36, DR. RK
SHIRODKAR MARG, PAREL, MUMBAI, STATE OF MAHARASTRA
...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 Courtmay be pleased to Grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners in the event of their arrest in connection with the Non-Bailable
Warrants dated 18.09.2025 issued by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Culcutta, in Case No. C5/188513/25 and Direct the 2nd Respondent (Station House Officer, Tadepalli Police Station) to release the petitioners on bail, in the event of their arrest, upon such terms and conditions as this Honble Court may deem fit and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025
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 grant interim pre-arrest bail to the petitioners in connection with the Non-Bailable Warrants dated 18.09.2025 issued by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Culcutta, in Case No. C5/188513/25 in the interest of justice and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
1. V SAI KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
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 is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
(for brevity, “BNSS”) by the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking a direction to grant anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with the Non-Bailable Warrants dated 18.09.2025 issued by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Calcutta, in Case No. C5/188513/25, and for a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent – Station House Officer, Tadepalli Police Station, not to arrest them pursuant to the said warrants.
2. Heard Sri V. Sai Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mrs. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.
3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that they obtained a car loan facility from the 3rd respondent finance institution for purchasing a vehicle bearing No. AP 39 AU 3132 (Maruti Brezza). According to the petitioners, they were initially regular in payment of installments; however, due to certain financial constraints they could not continue the payments regularly. It is their contention that the dispute between the parties is essentially of a financial and contractual nature arising out of a loan and hypothecation agreement. It is further submitted that the 3rd respondent filed a private complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Calcutta, in Case No. C5/188513/25, invoking the provisions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Subsequently, the learned Magistrate issued Non-Bailable Warrants on 18.09.2025, which were transmitted to the 2nd respondent police for execution. It is stated that the police officials are visiting the residence of the petitioners frequently for execution of the said warrants, causing apprehension of arrest.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are law-abiding citizens and are residing at Tadepalli in Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh, and they earn their livelihood as daily wage workers. He would further submit that the petitioners have a genuine apprehension of arrest pursuant to the execution of the warrants issued by the Calcutta Court. It is also submitted that the petitioners could not appear before the said Court earlier due to financial hardship and the difficulty of travelling a long distance. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioners intend to comply with the legal process and are willing to work out their remedies before the competent Court. Therefore, it is prayed that appropriate protection may be granted to enable them to approach the concerned Court and seek appropriate relief in accordance with law.
5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders in the matter.
6. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel and a fair look at the material placed on record, it appears that the Non-Bailable
Warrants dated 18.09.2025 were issued by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Calcutta, in connection with Case No. C5/188513/25. The petitioners are seeking protection from arrest pursuant to the execution of the said warrants by the local police. At this stage, this Court is of the view that the petitioners can work out their remedies before the competent Criminal Court which issued the warrants or before the appropriate forum as provided under law. In the circumstances of the case, no further adjudication is required in the present petition.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. However, petitioners are at liberty to work out their remedies in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 10.03.2026. KKV
Date: 10.03.2026. KKV