Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/3258/2023 of JYESHTA SUSMITHA Vs KAKARLA SATISH on 26 February 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3258/2023 Between: 1. JYESHTA SUSMITHA, D/O JYESHTA SESHAGIRI
APHC010160532023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
Between:
1. JYESHTA SUSMITHA, D/O JYESHTA SESHAGIRI RAO, W/O
DUGGIRALA
SUBHRAMANYAM,AGED
YEARS,
OCC.
HOUSEHOLD, R/O PLOT NO. 207, AKSHARI EMPIRE, ANIL INN
RESTAURANT BACK SIDE, VALANDAPETA, BHEEMUNIPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. KAKARLA SATISH, S/O BANGARU RAO, AGED 39 YEARS, R/O D.
NO. 2-74-B, RAMALAYAM STREET, POCHAVARAM, WEST
GODAVARI DISTRICT.
2. KAKARLA VENKATESWARARAO, S/O SUBBA RAO, AGED 56
YEARS, R/O D.NO. 2-75/D, RAMALAYAM,POCHAVARAM, WEST
GODAVARI DISTRICT.
3. KAKARLA VENKATA SUBBARAO, S/O SURYANARAYANA, AGED
72 YEARS,R/O D. NO. 2-72/A, POCHAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI
DISTRICT.
4. DUGGIRALA PARAMESWARARAO, S/O RAMANNA, AGED 56
YEARS, R/O D. NO. 1-77/C, RAMALAYAM STREET, POCHAVARAM
VILLAGE, TALLAPUDI MANDAL,WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
5. KONDEPATI KASI VISWANADHAM, S/O RATNAJIRAO, AGED 45
YEARS, R/O 1-40/1, POCHAVARAM VILLAGE, WEST GODAVARI
DISTRICT.
6. MANDA GOVINDA RAJU GOVINDU, S/O VEERRAJU, AGED 50
YEARS, R/O D. NO. 1-80/C, POCHAVARAM VILLAGE, WEST
GODAVARI DISTRICT.
7. UKKUSURI SIVAJI, S/O ARAVALU, AGED 45 YEARS, R/O D. NO. 3- 103/1, RAMALAYAM
VEEDI,
TALLAPUDI
MANDAL,WEST
GODAVARI DISTRICT.
8. CHERUKURI NAGESWARA RAO, S/O DHARMARAO, AGED 48
YEARS,
R/O.
D.
NO.
3-103/1,
RAMALAYAM
VEEDHI,
POCHAVARAM,
TALLAPUDI
MANDAL,
WEST
GODAVARI
DISTRICT.
9. KAKARLA SATYA SRINIVASARAO, S/O VENKATA SUBBA RAO, AGED 43 YEARS,R/O D. NO. 2-72, RAMALAYAM STREET, POCHAVARAM VILLAGE, TALLAPUDI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI
DISTRICT.
AT
PRESENT
RESIDING
IN
FLAT
NO.
502,VISHUNUMAYUKA
APARTMENTS,
OLD
GAJUWAKA,VISAKAPATNAM.
10. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT
AMARAVATHI.
...RESPONDENTS:
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 cancel the pre-arrest bail granted on 14.07.2021 in Crl.P.No.3427 of 2021 in Cr.No.307 of 2021 of Kovvur Town Police Station and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. P VIVEK
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO
2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
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 seeking cancellation of the pre-arrest bail granted to the respondent Nos.1 to 9/Accused Nos.1 to 9, on 14.07.2021 in Crl.P.No.3427 of 2021 in Cr.No.307 of 2021 of Kovvur Town Police Station.
2. Heard Sri Posani Venkateswarlu, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri P.Vivek, learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant, Sri Mangena Sree Rama Rao, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 9 and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State.
3. As can be seen from the record, the respondent Nos.1 to 9/Accused Nos. 1 to 9 were granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.3427 of 2021 vide order dated 14.07.2021, wherein two conditions were imposed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner preferred the present petition seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail on the ground that the petitioners failed to comply with the conditions i.e., the condition not to enter into village till filing of charge sheet.
5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the respondent Nos. 1 to 9/accused Nos.1 to 9, have complied with the conditions imposed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court till filing of charge sheet. Charge sheet is filed in this matter. The matter is pending before the concerned Court for trial.
6. The report received from the Court would show that because of the order of stay dated 27.11.2023 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in Crl.P.No.9203 of 2023 before this Court which is preferred by the accused seeking quashment, which is being extended from time to time, the learned Magistrate could not commit the case to the Sessions Division.
7. In the light of the above, in absence of any violation of conditions imposed, while granting bail to the respondents/accused Nos. 1 to 9, this is not a fit case for cancellation of the bail.
8. In that view of the matter, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 27.02.2026. UPS
Dt.27.02.2026
UPS