Regular bail may be granted where there is an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR, the accused has no criminal antecedents, co-accused have been granted bail, and substantial investigation is complete, making continued detention unnecessary.

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 to enlarge the prays Petitioner/Accused No. 3 on bail in connection with Crime No. 08 of 2026 on the file of the Srikalahasti II Town Police Station, Tirupathi District in the interest of justice and pass

The Court made the following:

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Narik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , has been filed by the Petitioner/A.3, seeking bail, in Crime No.08 of 2026 of Srikalahasti II Town Police Station, Tirupati District.

A case has been registered against the Petitioner/A.3 herein and other accused for the offences punishable under Section 351(2), 126(2), 109(1) r/w. 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’).

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 11.01.2026 at about 10:28 A.M. at Kummari Street, Bahadurpet, Srikalahasti Town, and the report was lodged on 20.01.2026 at 11:00 A.M. by the complainant, Shaik Ameenulla. The complainant alleged that, owing to prior disputes relating to Narthaki Bar and his refusal to support A-1 in financial disputes, A-1 had been threatening him with dire consequences. It is alleged that on 11.01.2026, while the complainant was proceeding in his car along with his wife and children, A-1 wrongfully restrained and threatened him, and thereafter, along with A-2 and A-3, assaulted and attempted to obstruct him. It is further alleged that A-1 poured petrol on the complainant’s car and threatened to burn the family. On the intervention of nearby persons and after a 100 call was made, the accused allegedly fled from the scene. The complainant stated that, due to fear and subsequent medical treatment of his wife, the report was lodged with delay.

Sri C. Nageshwara Rao, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri V. Uday Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the de facto complainant, with mala fide intention to harass the accused, lodged a false and fabricated complaint containing baseless allegations. A bare perusal of the report shows that though the alleged incident occurred on 11.01.2026 at 10:30 A.M., the complaint was lodged only on 20.01.2026, after an unexplained delay of nine days, which itself casts serious doubt on the veracity of the allegations. It is further submitted that the allegations are an afterthought, deliberately made to falsely implicate the petitioner and his family members. The petitioner had no connection with the alleged disputes or transactions between the de facto complainant and Accused No.1 and was implicated solely for being his son. It is submitted that the petitioner was falsely arrayed as Accused No.3 without any basis. Even the wife of Accused No.1 was implicated through omnibus allegations to give gravity to the case. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents. It is submitted that Accused Nos.1 and 2 filed Crl.M.P. No.14 of 2026 before the learned XII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srikalahasti, and the same was allowed by order dated 24.02.2026. It is submitted that the petitioner earlier filed Crl.P. No.1777 of 2026 before this Court, which was disposed of on 12.03.2026 permitting him to surrender and seek regular bail. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner surrendered on 05.05.2026 and was remanded to judicial custody. Thereafter, his regular bail application in Crl.M.P. No.125 of 2026 was dismissed on 07.05.2026. It is further submitted that substantial investigation has since been completed and material witnesses have been examined. Continued detention of the petitioner serves no purpose, especially when trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future. The petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and there is no possibility of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

Le