The court emphasized that coercive actions against the accused are unjustified if no prior accusations warrant such measures under Section 111(2).

FRIDAY.THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6297/2025 Between:

Chintha Adi Reddy ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1.N SIVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following:

HARINATH.N,J HN, J Crl.P.No.6297 2025 The Court made the following Order:

1. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.1 in Crime No. 104 of 2025, on the file of Ramachandrapuram Police Station, Dr.B.R.A.Konaseema District, for the alleged offence under Sections 111(2), 318(4), 61(2)

read with Section 3 (5)

of the BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act .

2. It is submitted that the petitioner is not arraigned as an accused in any other crime except for the present case. It is further submitted that Section 111(2) of the BNS cannot be invoked against the petitioner, as the petitioner has not been invoked in any other crime that would attract the provisions of Section 111(2). Apart from Section 111(2) of the BNS , the remaining allegations against the petitioner pertain to offences punishable with imprisonment of less than three years.

3. Considering the same, there shall be a direction to the Station House Officer, Ramachandrapuram Police Station, Dr.B.R.A.Konaseema District, to complete the investigation without taking any coercive steps against the petitioner. However, this shall not preclude the Investigating Officer from filing the final report after completion of the investigation. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation.

4. Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed off.