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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 9888

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Vemula Satish Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
CRLP 2360/2026



##PAGE1##

APHC010155012026 2026:APHC:28662 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3396]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2360/2026 Between:

1. V EMULA SATISH KUMAR, S/O. VEMULA DURGA RAO, AGED ABOUT

20 YEARS, R/O.PLOT NO 50, ODA COLONY, SINGH NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 520015.

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGHCOURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI,

GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRAPRADESH.

2. V ICTIMS PATERNAL AUNT, W ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):

Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased enlarge The Petitioner/Accused In Crime No.25 of 2026 dated 16/01/2026 of Ajith Singh Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada and

pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1. ABDUS SALEEM Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

##PAGE2##

2

2026:APHC:28662 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2360/2026

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, has been

filed by the Petitioner herein/Accused, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.25 of 2026 dated 16/01/2026 of Ajith Singh Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada, registered for the offences punishable under Section 137(2), 65(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for brevity “BNS”), Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short “POCSO Act”) and Section 9 of

Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (for short “PCMA”).

2. Heard Sri Abdus Saleem, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that notice was served

on the defacto complainant through police.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, the accused developed acquaintance with the victim minor girl, aged about 17 years and on 15.01.2026 at 14-00 hours, accused kidnapped the victim girl on his bike from her work place and took her to empty plot situated behind an iron shed near the embankment at the end of Rajiv Nagar, Vaddera colony and had physical contact with her forcibly and that night, he again took her to Ammavari Temple at I Town, tied tali stating that they were married and stayed there. On the morning of 16.01.2026, the

##PAGE3##

3

2026:APHC:28662 accused brought the victim to her house. Basing on the complaint of the paternal

aunt of the victim girl, the present case has been lodged.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein is aged about 20 years and doing concrete slab works along with his father to get earnings for their family livelihood. The petitioner herein is innocent and he is falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner/accused and the victim loved each other and with good intention, the petitioner married her and brought her to their house. Most of the investigation might have been completed by this time. He would further submit that the petitioner was shown as accused in Cr.No.197 of 2024 of Ajith Singh Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada, alleging that he has thrown the stone on the then Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh and caused injury on his forehead and later he was enlarged on bail. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Ajith Singh Nagar, Vaddera colony. It is also submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble

Court and will comply with any conditions that may be imposed by the Court.

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that the investigation is still pending for RFSL report. So far six (6) witnesses were examined. There are other criminal cases pending against the

petitioner. She finally prays for dismissal

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