The court established that prolonged pre-trial detention, without the commencement of trial or significant progress, constitutes punitive imprisonment violative of Article 21, and that bail should generally be granted when investigation is complete and charge sheets are filed, unless specific grounds for tampering or evasion exist.

ORDER :

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.

The instant Criminal Petitions under Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023[ For short ‘BNSS’] has been filed by the Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 and 51 respectively, seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No.21 of 2024 of CID Police Station, Mangalagiri, Guntur District registered for the offences under Sections 409, 420, and 120-B read with Sections 34, 37 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860[For short ‘IPC’] and Sections 7, 7(a), 8, 13 (1) (b) & 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988[For short ‘PC Act’].

Case of the Prosecution precisely, is as follows:

2. The present crime arises out of allegations concerning large-scale irregularities in the implementation of the excise policy and functioning of the Andhra Pradesh State Beverages Corporation Limited (APSBCL) during 2019 to 2024. The matter came to light upon a representation made to the Principal Secretary to the Government of Andhra Pradesh, on 26.08.2024 by one Venkateswara Rao Srinivas, alleging irregularities in the excise policy from 2019 to 2024. The report highlighted issues such as unfair discrimination in the allocation of Orders for Supply (OFS) of liquor, leading to the suppression of established brands and preferential treatment for new brands, in violation of existing norms. It also raised concerns about the shift from an automated to a manual OFS system, which could allow for manipulations. After an enquiry, Principal Secretary referred the complaint to CID Police, Mangalagiri, which registered a case in Crime No.21 of 2024 against unknown persons on 23.09.2024, alleging offences under Sections 409, 420, and 120-B of IPC. On 05.02.2025, the Government constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT), vide G.O.Rt.No.262 to investigate the alleged irregularities in the excise policy and related crimes.

Arguments advanced at the Bar:

3. Heard Sri Siddharth Dave, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Patil Yugandhar Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner / Accused No.1, Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms.Shagufta Jahan Noor, learned counsel for Petitioner / Accused No.51, and Sri Siddharth Aggarwal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri M.Lakshmi Narayana, learned Public Prosecutor for State.

On behalf of the Petitioner / Accused No.1:

4. Sri Siddharth Dave, Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner / Accused No.1 would submit that this is the second bail application filed before this Court by the Petitioner seeking regular bail. The first application in Crl.P.No.11425 of 2025 was dismissed by this Court vide Common Order dated 29.01.2026 mainly on the ground that if the Petitioner is released on bail, he may either facilitate the evasion of Accused No.7 in the present crime, who is his co-brother from the process of law or impede the efforts of the investigating agency to secure his presence. Learned Senior Counsel would further submit that the Special Leave Petition filed by the Petitioner before the Hon’ble Supreme Court came to be withdrawn with a liberty to renew the plea for regular bail at an appropriate stage.

Learned Senior Counsel would contend that, Accused No.7, who is the basis for denial of bail to the Petitioner herein, has surrendered before the Investigating Agency on 26.02.2026 in order to cooperate with the investigation and has been sent for judicial remand on the same day. Subsequently, he was granted regular bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 20.03.2026. As such, the basis for the denial of bail to the Petitioner by this Court stands removed and there are no legal or factual fetters to grant bail to the Petitioner, in view of the above substantive change in circumstances.

Learned Senior Counsel argues that, so far, 15 Accused were arrested out of which, 13 Accused were already granted bail. It is submitted that the investigation in so far as the Petitioner / Accused No.1 is concerned, has been completed and charge sheet has also been filed, however,