AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/accused on pre-arrest bail in Crime No.49 of 2026 of Darsi Prohibition and Excise Police Station, Prakasham District, registered against the petitioner/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 34(1) read with 34(1)(ii) of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968 (for brevity, ‘the Excise Act’).
Sri Mr.Ramu Panchumarthi, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in the case and that petitioner has not committed any offence; Petitioner is a law-abiding citizen; Petitioner is sole earning member of the family and if the petitioner is arrested, it would cause hardship to his dependents; Petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of the foregoing submissions, the learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice.
Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohit, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that she may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing submissions, it is urged that the petition be dismissed.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.
“Whether the Petitioners/Accused is entitled for grant of pre-arrest bail?”
As seen from the record, it is alleged against the petitioner/accused that 24 bottles of 650ml non-duty paid liquor bottles and 90 bottles of 180ml non-duty paid liquor bottles worth of Rs.18,477/-, were seized from the petitioner in a raid. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner belongs to the opposition political party and that the case filed against him is a politically motivated one and that the petitioner was not there at the scene of crime at the relevant point of time and that he was in Ongole. Further, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the role of the petitioner came to light only based on the information of the mediators. The petitioner/accused is a permanent resident of Prakasam District and he is fixed abode. There are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. This Court is of the opinion that there is no flight risk if the petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail.
Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity and nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner/accused, this Court deems it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/accused with some stringent conditions.
In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions:
In the event of arrest, petitioner/accused shall be enlarged on bail subject to executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials.
The petitioner/accused shall make himself available for investigation as and when required.
The petitioner/accused shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses.
The petitioner/accused shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned once in a week i.e. on every Saturday, between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet.
The petitioner/accused shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without the express permission from the Station House Officer concerned.
The petitioner/accused shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court.
The petitioner/accused shall surrender his passport, if any, to the Investigating Officer. If he claims that he does not have passport, he shall submit affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer.