APHC010064222026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3396]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 977/2026 Between:

1. M AKIREDDI RAMAKRISHNA NAIDU ALIAS MAKIREDDY VENKAT SATYARAMA KRISHNA, S/O SATYANARAYANA,AGE 45 YEARS, CASTE K. VELAMA, CONTRACTOR,R/O. D.NO.1- 1,PAPUSETTIPALEM VILLAGE,GOLUGUNDA MANDAL,VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

2. M AKIREDDY VIJAYA LAKSHMI, W/O. MAKIREDDY VENKAT SATYARAMA KRISHNA,AGED 35 YEARS,R/O. D.NO.1- 1,PAPUSETTIPALEM VILLAGE,GOLUGUNDA MANDAL,VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, through S.H.O., Golugunda P.S, Golugunda, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati.

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

1. P NANILU NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 977 of 2026

Order:

The Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’), by the petitioners, who are Accused Nos.1 and 2, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.15 of 2026 of Golugonda Police Station, Anakapalli District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 03.02.2026 at about 16:00 hours, the complainant, U.S.V. Srinivasa Rao, MPDO, lodged a report stating that in Jammadevipeta Village of Pappusettipalem Gram Panchayat, Golugonda Mandal, the villagers themselves collected money for construction of a community hall and completed the foundation and pillars. Thereafter, accused No.1, namely Makireddy Rama Krishna Naidu, husband of the Sarpanch, who acted as contractor for the said work, constructed the slab of the community hall and submitted bills under the 15th Finance Commission funds, thereby drawing an amount of Rs.2,94,000/-. It is further alleged that during an enquiry conducted by the Panchayat Raj Department officials, in the presence of villagers, accused No.1 admitted misappropriation of Government funds and undertook to repay the remaining amount of Rs.1,51,181/- between 10.02.2025 and 20.02.2025. He also submitted a written undertaking to that effect. Subsequently, the District Panchayat Officer (DPO), Anakapalli District, issued show cause notices to the Sarpanch and accused No.1 and cancelled the cheque drawing powers of the Sarpanch. However, the said amount has not been repaid till date. Hence, the present report.

3. Mr. Nanilu Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the ingredients of offences as alleged under Sections 318(4), 316(5) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 does not attract as against the petitioners in the present case. The petitioner No.1 had voluntarily participated in the enquiry conducted by the officials of Panchayat Raj Department and admitted to repay the balance amount, but the amount has not been paid due to some financial constraints. Only out of personal grudge, the petitioners were falsely implicated in the case and hence, prays to allow the petition.

4. Mr. K. Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is at a nascent stage and the ingredients of the offences punishable under the aforesaid provisions clearly attract against the petitioners. It is contended that accused No.1 admitted misappropriation of funds during the Panchayat enquiry and therefore prays for dismissal of the petition.

5. A perusal of the material on record prima facie discloses that the villagers had collected money and constructed part of the community hall, whereas accused No.1, acting as contractor, constructed the slab and claimed amounts under the 15^th Finance Commission funds to the tune of