Pre-arrest bail denied due to specific overt acts against petitioners and ongoing investigation concerns.

ORDER

The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS S ’) by the petitioners/Accused Nos.4 to 6 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.69 of 2025 of Dharmavaram Rural Police Station, Sri Sathya Sai District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 118 (1), 109 (1) read with 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS ’).

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 25.05.2025, at about 09.00 a.m., the accused and some others attacked the complainant’s son, Vijay, with sticks, sickles, spears, and iron pipes with the intent to eliminate him, causing bleeding injuries. At the time, Vijay was on his way to Sudhakar’s mango garden along with their relative Seena to load mangoes onto his Bolero vehicle. Seeing this, the complainant, his younger brother Lakshminarayana, and their relative Appaswamy went to rescue Vijay from the clutches of the accused. However, the accused also attacked them with sticks, spears, and iron pipes, causing bleeding and serious injuries. When people began arriving at the spot, the accused fled from there. This attack was allegedly due to Accused No.1 suspecting that Vijay was having an extramarital affair with his second wife. Basing on the statement of the complainant, a case was registered.

3. Mr. Yattapu Bharath Kumar Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the petitioners are the sole earning members of the family and, therefore, their incarceration would cause undue hardship to their dependents. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners were not even present at the alleged scene of offence. They were falsely implicated as accused being the sons of Accused Nos.2 and 3 respectively. The de-facto complainant, having grudge against the petitioners that they did not compromise the case in Cr.No.136 of 2023 of Dharmavaram Rural Police Station, falsely implicated all the family members of the petitioners. The 1^st petitioner is a Software Engineer, the 2^nd petitioner is a B.Tech student and the 3^rd petitioner is an MCA student. The petitioners undertake to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of the foregoing submissions, learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice.

4. Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest 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 pre-arrest bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. It is further contended that there are specific overt acts leveled against the petitioners, hence grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners is not feasible, as it would amount to giving licence for the commission of the offence or shielding them for the commission of the offence, and it is urged to dismiss the petition.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

6. As seen from the statement of the de-facto complainant, who allegedly suffered injuries at the hands of the petitioners and other accused, specific overt acts are categorically attributed against the petitioners, stating that they wielded iron pipes, sickles, sticks, and other weapons, attacked