SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 15751

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
NYAPATHY VIJAY, J
Sirigireddy Arjun Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Petition No: 8067/2024|Criminal Petition No: 8117/2024|Criminal Petition No: 8675/2024|Criminal Petition No: 8900/2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: DAGGUBATI RAMASWAMY REDDY
For the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The absence of prior chargesheets for related offenses under Section 111 of BNS negates the basis for prosecution under organized crime laws, warranting procedural compliance for anticipatory bail.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 111 - Anticipatory bail applications - Petitioner, implicated as A.2 in multiple crimes related to derogatory social media posts, argues that Section 111 requires prior chargesheets for applicability - The Court finds absence of necessary prior chargesheets indicates unwarranted invocation of Section 111 - Court emphasizes procedural adherence per Section 35(3) of BNSS. (Paras 20, 24, 28)

(B) Organized Crime - Definition and applicability under BNS - The court clarifies that material benefit as per Section 111 must be demonstrated, and absence of dual previous chargesheets disqualifies the proceedings for organized crime charges. (Paras 21, 25)

Facts of the case:
The Petitioner faces allegations of orchestrating derogatory posts on social media against rival political figures through co-accused, implicated via confessions. The charges include Sections from the BNS and Information Technology Act due to the nature of the posts.

Findings of Court:
The Petitioner is not granted anticipatory bail, with directions for proper procedural compliance under Section 35(3) of the BNSS.

Issues: Whether the Petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail considering charges under Section 111 of the BNS.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that without the requisite conditions satisfied to invoke Section 111, the charges are unconstitutional at this stage, emphasizing adherence to legal standards.

Result: Criminal Petitions disposed of as directed.

Table of Content
1. factual background of charges (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
2. nature of allegations against the petitioner (Para 11 , 12)
3. penalties for the alleged offences (Para 13 , 14)
4. hearing and participation of counsel (Para 15)
5. arguments on the applicability of section 111 (Para 16 , 17 , 18)
6. issue for consideration (Para 19)
7. court's analysis on section 111 (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)
8. court's conclusion and order (Para 28)

COMMON ORDER:

The present applications are filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 seeking anticipatory bail. In all these criminal petitions Sirigirreddy Arjun Reddy is the Petitioner.

2. Brief facts of each of the case are as under:

3. Crl.P.No.8067 of 2024: The Petitioner is A.2 in Crime No.263 of 2024 on the file of Gudivada II Town Urban Police Station, Krishna District filed for the offences under Sections 192, 196, 336(4), 340(2), 353(2), 111(2)(b), 61(2) and 79 of the BNS and Section 67 of the Information Technology, Act, 2000.

4. A complaint was lodged on 3.11.2024 by one Akunuri Sriram Kanakabharam against the Khaja Baba Mohammad regarding abusive posts in social media. Initially, Khaja Baba Mohammed was arrayed as Accused No.1 in the crime. During investigation, it came to light that Petitioner and others on behalf of YSRCP political party were allegedly paying the Khaja Baba Mohammed for posting derogatory content and are the main accused in the case and hence, the Petitioner was implicated as A.2 in the crime.

5. Crl.P.No.8117 of 2024: The Petitioner is A.2 in Crime No.165 of 2024 on the file of Kadiri Rural Police Station, Sri Satya Sai District filed for the offences under Sections 196, of BNS and 66 of Information Technology Act , 20000. Subsequently, Section 111 (2)(b) of BNS was added in the remand report.

6. A complaint was lodged on 02.11.2024 by one Shaik Mohhamed Juned against one Malaka Amarnath Reddy regarding abusive posts in social media and he was initially arrayed as Accused No.1. Basing on the confession of the Malaka Amarnath Reddy the Petitioner and others on behalf of YSRCP political party were allegedly paying the original accused for posting derogatory content and are the main accused in the case, the Petitioner was implicated as A.2 in the crime.

7. Crl.P.No.8675 of 2024: The Petitioner is A.3 in Crime No.213 of 2024 on the file of Prakash Nagar Police Station, East Godavari District filed for the offences under Sections 196, 353(2) of BNS and subsequently 61(2), 111(2)(b), 196, 336(4), 340(2), 353(2), 356(2) of BNS and Section 67 of Information Technology Act , 2000 were added in the remand report.

8. A complaint was lodged on 07.11.2024 by one Borra Chinni Babu against one Inturi Ravi Kiran regarding abusive posts in social media. Based on the confession of the said Inturi Ravi Kiran, the Petitioner was implicated as A.3 in the crime.

9. Crl.P.No.8900 of 2024: The Petitioner is Proposed Accused No.3 in Crime No.228 of 2024 on the file of Macherla Town Police Station, Palnadu District filed for the offences under Sections 61(2), 111(2) (b), 196, 352 and 353 of BNS and Section 67 of the Information and Technology Act, 2000.

10. A complaint was lodged on 10.11.2024 by one Kabhampati Anil Kumar against one Inturi Ravi Kiran regarding abusive posts in social media. Based on the confession of the said Inturi Ravi Kiran that Petitioner and others on behalf of YSRCP political party were allegedly paying the original accused for posting derogatory content and are the main accused in the case, the Petitioner was implicated as A.2 in the crime.

11. The offence alleged, in short, was that derogatory/abusive posts were spread in social media platforms against the rival political leaders holding Constitutional posts.

12. The Petitioner was arrayed as accused on the basis of confessions made by the co-accused i.e. persons in whose names the social media accounts were registered. The common thread of allegations agains

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top