Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/10217/2025 of ESWARA RAO VIZZUROTHI Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 26 February 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL Between: 1. ESWARA RAO VIZZUROTHI, S/O. V. SEETHA RAMULU AGE 44 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS
APHC010523542025
IN THE H
(
FRIDAY,THE TW
TWO T
THE HONOURABLE DR
CRIMIN
Between:
1. ESWARA RAO VIZZ
YEARS, OCC BUSIN
APARTMENTS NEAR
GODAVARI DISTRICT
2. VASAMSETTY RAMA
YEARS, OCC BUSIN
STREET, BUDAMPET
3. AMBATI SATYANA N
APPALA SWAMY APP
D. NO. 3-21-31, PE
TOWN KAKINADA DIS
1. THE STATE OF A
PUBLIC PROSECUT
KAKINADA, HIGH CO
2. SRI RAMA CHAND
MURTHY (LATE), VA
KAKINADA DISTRICT
PER THE COURT OR
2025.
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
R JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PR
NAL PETITION NO: 10217/2025
UROTHI, S/O. V. SEETHA RAMULU
NESS R/O. FLAT NO. 511 THE LA
R BY GOGOLAMMA TEMPLE RAYALA
T.
A SESHADRI, S/O. V. SURYA RAO,
NESS R/O. D. NO. 41-6-1, PUSAR
T KAKINADA TOWN KAKINADA DISTR
NARAYANA @ AMBATI CHINNA, S/O
PA RAO, AGE 52 YEARS OCC BUSIN
DDA VEEDHI, RACHERLA PETA K
STRICT.
...PETITIONER/ACC
AND
NDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED
TOR THROUGH SHO, SARPAVA
OURT OF AP AT AMARAVATHI.
DRA MURTHY CHALLA, S/O. NA
ALASAPAKALA VILLAGE, KAKINADA
T, A.P. RESPONDENT NO.2 IS IMPLE
RDER DATED 08.10.2025 IN CRL.P.NO
...RESPONDENT/COMPLA
Y
RATAPA
AGE 44
ANDMARK
AM WEST
AGE 42
RLA VARI
RICT.
O. CHINNA
ESS R/O.
KAKINADA
CUSED(S)
D BY ITS
RAM PS,
ARASIMHA
A RURAL,
EADED AS
.10217 OF
INANT(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 the anticipatory bail to the petitioners / Accused Nos 1, 2 & 4 in the event of their arrest in Connection with Crime No. 357 of 2025 dated 02.09.2025 on the file of the Sarpavaram Police Station Kakinada District 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 pleased to grant interim bail to the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 2 & 4 in Crime. No. 357 of 2025 dated 02.09.2025
on the file of the Sarpavaram Police Station Kakinada District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
1.GANGISETTI UMA SANKAR
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1.G SRI HARSHA
2.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
3.SRINIVASA RAO MORTHA
4.LEGAL AID
The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10217 OF 2025
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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 Nos.1, 2 & 4 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.357 of 2025, dated 02.09.2025 on the file of the Sarpavaram Police Station, Kakinada District for offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 333, 308(5) r/w 3 (5) BNS.
2. The case of the prosecution, as set out in the complaint, is that the de- facto complainant, namely Challa Sri Rama Chandra Murthy, reported that he had known Accused No.1 for the past ten years and had been supplying prawns to him. It is alleged that by 31.03.2023, the accused owed an amount of Rs.69,00,000/- to the complainant. Thereafter, on the pretext of marriage and business requirements, the accused allegedly obtained cheques, promissory notes and further amounts totaling Rs.50,00,000/-, promising to repay Rs.99,00,000/-, but failed to repay any amount. It is further alleged that on 29.08.2025 at about 8:00 PM, Accused No.1 along with his associates criminally trespassed into the complainant’s house in his absence, threatened his wife, and later intercepted the complainant near Ramanayyapeta, allegedly putting a knife to his neck, extorting Rs.10,000/- and issuing death threats if repayment was demanded. The complaint lodged a complaint on 02.09.2025 for the alleged above offences.
3. Heard Sri Gangisetti Uma Sankar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs K.Lakshmi Prasanna, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. Perused the record.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition may be disposed of by giving protection to the petitioner vide guidelines of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar1.
5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the offences registered against the petitioner are punishable with less than seven years period of imprisonment and necessary direction may be given to the concerned Station House Officer.
6. This Court has carefully considered the submissions. Admittedly, there appears to be a serious financial dispute between the parties arising out of business transactions. The investigation is at a nascent stage. Though there is an allegation of extortion in the second incident, the genuineness or otherwise of the said allegation cannot be decided at this stage. This Court is not inclined to adjudicate upon the culpability of the petitioners at this juncture.
6. Considering the submissions, this Criminal petition is disposed of, with the following;
a. Investigating Officer is at liberty to complete the investigation, in accordance with law.
b. However, the police are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners. It does not preclude the investigating agency in filing the report before the Court.
c. In the event of any coercive action sought to be taken against the petitioners, concerned police authorities are further directed to scrupulously follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35 (3) of BNSS., [Section 41-A Cr.P.C] and the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar’s case (supra).
d. The Petitioners shall make themselves available for investigation and shall cooperate with the investigating officer for further investigation and submit relevant documents and material for the purpose of investigation.
e. The petitioners shall deposit their passports with the investigation officer and shall not leave the country without permission of the Court.
__________________________________
DR.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 27.02.2026 KKV
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10217 OF 2026 27.02.2026
KKV