Dudela Venkata Reddy Alias Devudu & Ors. vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.

These three Criminal Petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by this Common order, although the Petitioners in the three petitions are different, the crime registered against them is one and the same.

The Criminal Petition Nos.6723 & 6733 of 2026 have been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 2 and 6 to 9 on bail in Crime No.61 of 2026 of Peddaraveedu Police Station, Markapuram District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 118(1), 329(3), and 324(4) read with 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’).

Criminal Petition No.6742 of 2026 has been filed under Section 482 of ‘the BNSS.,’ by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 5 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with the very same Crime No.61 of 2026 of Peddaraveedu Police Station.

The case of the prosecution, in nutshell, that, on 12.07.2026 at about 09.30 hours, the complainant and his family members were overseeing the construction of a boundary wall in Ac.0.32 cents of land in Survey No.4/3A of Hanuman Junction Kunta Village, Peddaraveedu Mandal. It is alleged that the accused persons, forming themselves into an unlawful assembly, criminally trespassed into the land, damaged the boundary wall, picked up a quarrel with the complainant and his family members and assaulted them with sticks and stones. In the said incident, the complainant and two others sustained bleeding and swelling injuries. On hearing their cries, nearby persons intervened and rescued them.

Mr.M.S.S.S.Prakash Babu, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of Sri Dr Mojjada Ramakrishna, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 and 6 to 9 submits that the dispute between the parties is essentially civil in nature relating to land in Sy.No.4/3A and has been given a criminal colour. A counter case in Crime No.62 of 2026 has also been registered against the complainant party, and both sides sustained only simple injuries, indicating a free fight. Petitioner No.4 has already instituted a civil suit and obtained an ad-interim injunction in respect of the disputed property. The injuries suffered by the witnesses are simple in nature and the ingredients of Sections 109(1) and 308 of ‘the BNS.,’ are not attracted. The Petitioners voluntarily appeared before the police and cooperated with the investigation. The investigation has substantially progressed and no further custodial interrogation is required. The Petitioners have been in judicial custody since 16/17.07.2026. They are permanent residents, have no criminal antecedents, and there is no likelihood of their absconding or tampering with evidence. Petitioner No.2 is pursuing a Ph.D. at IIT Kharagpur and his continued detention would adversely affect his academic career. Hence, it is urged to allow the Criminal Petitions.

The learned Counsel for the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 5 further submits the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 5 are innocent women aged about 56 years and 33 years respectively, and have been falsely implicated in Crime No.61 of 2026 arising out of a long-standing civil dispute relating to land in Sy.No.4/3A. There are no specific overt acts attributed to the Petitioners and that the allegations against them are vague and omnibus in nature. The learned counsel further submits that the investigation has substantially progressed, material witnesses have been examined, and no custodial interrogation of the women Petitioners is required. The Petitioners are permanent residents of the locality, have no criminal antecedents, and are ready to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any conditions imposed by the Court. It is therefore prayed that, in the event of their arrest, the Petitioners be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Per contra, Mr.A. Sai Rohit, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioners, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the Petitioners are released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. Hence, it is urged to dismiss the Criminal Petitions.

The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor further submits, vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 5, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the Petitioners are released on anticipatory bail, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. Hence, it is urged to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

Sri Venkateswarlu Gadipudi, learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 submits that the investigation is still in progress and that several material witnesses are yet to be examined. It was further contended that, if the Petitioners are enlarged on bail at this stage, there is a reasonable apprehension that they may abscond, thereby obstructing the ongoing investigation and evading the due process of law. On these grounds, the learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 urges for dismissal of the Criminal Petitions.

Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 5 and submits that the investigation is still in progress and that several material witnesses are yet to be examined. It is further contended that, in the event the Petitioners are granted anticipatory bail at this stage, there is a strong possibility of their absconding, which may adversely affect the ongoing investigation and enable them to evade the process of law. Hence, it is urged to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record.

In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration is:

As borne out by the record, Accused No. 3 has already been granted temporary bail vide order dated 31.08.2026. Accused No. 3 is a student pursuing his studies at IIT Kharagpur. The Petitioners/Accused were arrested on 17.07.2026 and have been in judicial custody for the past 55 days. So far, twelve witnesses have been examined. It is alleged that there was a free fight between two groups, pursuant to which case and counter-cases came to be registered. With regard to allegations against the Petitioner/Accused Nos.4 and 5. They are bald and omnibus in nature. They are females aged about 56 and 33 years respectively. They are permanent residents of Yerragondapalem Mandal, Markapuram District. They have got fixed abode.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 and 6 to 9, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 3 and 6 to 9 on bail and Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 and 5 on pre-arrest bail with some stringent conditions.

In the result, the Criminal Petitions are allowed with the following stringent conditions: