(Special Original Jurisdiction)

The Court made the following:

ORDER:-

The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Narik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNSS‟) by the Petitioner/Accused No.1 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.107 of 2025 of Komarolu Police Station, Prakasam District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 376(a)f, 417 r/w 34 of IPC.

Heard Mr.D.Kodandarami Reddy, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.

The case of the prosecution in brief is that this is a case of cheating and rape committed on a woman under the false promise of marriage being a relative with common intention that occurred on 23.10.2023 at the residence of accused at Patharamapuram Village, Kalasapadu Mandal, YSR Kadapa District. On 27.10.2025 at 16.00 hours the accused/accused No.1 who is close relative developed intimacy with her and by give a false promise that he would marry her had sexual intercourse with her several times at his residence at Patharampuram Village and later at her residence at Edamakallu Village and during that period the parents of accused Nos.2 and 3 also assured the complainant‟s family that the marriage would be performed. Believing the assurance both families executed a written marriage agreement before Advocate Gurrala Ramulu at Giddalur on 14.06.2024. But accused No.1 after completed his training and joined duty in the Indian Army he refused to marry the complainant and disowned the promise with the support of accused Nos.2 and 3. Later when the complainant and her family questioned them all the accused and threatened them with dire consequences and thus the accused No.1 cheated the complainant and committed rape on her without her consent under false promise of marriage and accused Nos.2 and 3 abetted and supported the cheating of the accused No.1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is no way concerned with the alleged offences. The petitioner is falsely implicated in the present crime. The learned counsel would further submits that the petitioner approached this Hon‟ble Court vide Crl.P.No.12243 of 2025 and this Hon‟ble Court its order dated 02.12.2025 directed the investigating officer not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner and the investigating officer shall proceed with investigation and again vide order 23.02.2026 this Hon‟ble Court extended the interim protection for a period of three weeks as to enable the petitioner to approach the concerned jurisdictional Court and to file appropriate application. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is serving in Indian Army in 19th Battalion Punjab Regiment since 07.06.2024 and he never committed any crime or is involved in any such offences earlier and therefore the petitioner do not have any previous criminal antecedents of any nature and the learned counsel would further submits that the petitioner is apprehending the arrest and if he sent to judicial custody he would loss his job and his became miserable. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioners are ready and willing to furnish sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the police officials.

The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the petition contending that petitioner/accused No.1 failed to approached before the investigating officer and did not co-operative the investigation but the accused not supported the investigation and if the accused released on anticipatory bail, the accused not support the investigation in this case and further opposed that the petitioner is released on bail, he may threatened the prosecution witnesses and prays to dismiss the petition.

The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the Judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Nitin B. Nikhare vs. The State of Maharashtra and another¹Crl.A.No.