##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:42959

APHC010723312025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3396]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 29/2026

Between:

KADURU CHINNAPPANNA, S/O LATE CHINNA RAO,HINDU, AGED ABOUT

35 YEARS,OCC FORMER SPECIAL OFFICER,ANDHRA PRADESH

BHAWAN, GOVT, OF ANDHRA PRADESH,R/O. 1-36, COLONY,

PAMULAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT CAUSE TITLE OF THE

PETITIONER IS AMENDED AS PER THE COURT ORDER DATED

20.01.2026 IN I.A.NO.1 OF 2026 IN CRL.P.NO.29 OF 2026.

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC

PROSECUTORHIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT

AMARAVATITHROUGH INVESTIGATION OFFICER.SPECIAL

INVESTIGATION TERAMSITADDITIONAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

ADMINTIRUPATI.

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1. UDAY KUMAR VAMPUGADAVALA

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

1. P S P SURESH KUMAR, SPL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR CBI

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition under Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), has been filed by the

Petitioner / Accused No.24, seeking regular bail in connection with Crime

No.470 of 2024 of Tirupati East Police Station, Tirupati District registered for

the offences under Sections 274, 275, 316(5), 318(3), 318(4), 61(2), 299

2026:APHC:42959

2

read with 49 read with 3(5) of BNS and Sections 51 and 59 of Food Safety

and Standards Act, 2006 (for short ‘FSS Act’).

2. It is alleged against the Petitioner / Accused No.24 that, while he was

working as P.A to Y.V.Subba Reddy, who acted as Chairman, TTD from

2019-2023, involved in larger conspiracy relating to the alleged supply of

adulterated ghee to Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, demanded and

collected illegal gratification from the Dairies.

3. Heard Sri C.Nageswara Rao, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri

V.Uday Kumar, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri P.S.P.Suresh

Kumar, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner

has not committed any offence as alleged. It is submitted that the earlier bail

application filed by the Petitioner was dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of

this Court in Crl.P.No.12357 of 2025, dated 15.12.2025 on the ground that

the investigation into the alleged role of the Petitioner was at a crucial stage.

It is further submitted that, so far, 48 witnesses have been examined, the

investigation with regard to the Petitioner has been completed and charge

sheet has also been filed. Learned Senior Counsel would submit that the

Petitioner has been in judicial custody from 29.10.2025 and the statements

of the witnesses prima facie disclose that further custodial interrogation of

the Petitioner is not required in this matter. It is further submitted that

cognizance of offences is yet to be taken in the present crime. Learned

3

Senior Counsel would submit that there is no necessity for further custody of

the Petitioner.

5. Per contra, Learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI would submit

that the Petitioner involved in grave and serious offences. Learned Special

Public Prosecutor would further submit that, the investigation so far done,

would reveal the role of the Petitioner in the alleged crime. It is further

submitted that the statements of the witnesses i.e., Sri Kailash Chand

Mangla and Sri P.P.Srinivasan confirmed the alleged demand of illegal

gratification by the Petitioner. It is further submitted that, the Petitioner is an

influential person and hence, there is a reasonable and well-founded

apprehension that, if he is enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of

influencing or threatening the prosecution witnesses. In support of his

contentions, reliance has been placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in Kalyan Chandra Sarkar vs. Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu

Yadav and another, 2026:APHC:42959. Learned Special Public Prosecutor would