Anticipatory bail denied based on evidence of grievous injuries, emphasizing seriousness of allegations and ongoing investigation.

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused No.1 in Crime No.66 of 2025 on the file of the P.S. Marriguda, Nalgonda District, registered for the offences punishable under Section s 109 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

2. The case of prosecution in brief is that on 13.05.2025, father of the de-facto complainant was attacked by accused No.1 and another, while he was on his bike to Khudhabakshapally. The accused allegedly kicked and beaten her father, while the villagers rescued him. The de-facto complainant sought first aid from a doctor and later sought legal action. Her father and other family members have land disputes since past two years, and the accused attacked her father with an intent to kill him. Basing on the same, Crime No.66 of 2025 was registered.

3. Heard Mr. A. Aravind Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed the offence and he was falsely implicated in the above crime. He further submitted that there are property disputes between the petitioner and the de facto complainant in respect of boundaries. To settle the said property disputes the de facto complainant demand a huge amount of Rs.80,00,000/-. When the petitioner failed to pay that amount he tried to grab the property of the petitioner, at that stage petitioner resisted the de facto complainant. He further submitted that the father of the de facto complainant is extremist and he was involved in several crimes. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the victim has not sustained any grievous injuries and ingredients under Section 109 of BNS are not attracted. He further submitted that the de facto complainant removed the boundary stones on 24.06.2025 and his health condition is very good and he himself removed the boundary stones in respect of the disputed property on 24.06.2025. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner filed two photographs annexed along with criminal petition at page Nos.14 and 15. He further submitted that the petitioner is not having any other criminal antecedents and he is the only breadwinner of his family and he shall abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court, and he is ready to cooperate with the investigation, if any. Hence, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has committed grave offence and the victim sustained grievous injuries including head injury in the hands of the petitioner and the investigation is at thresh hold. He further submitted that petitioner is also accused in Crime No.222 of 2024. At this stage, if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, he will interfere with the investigation and also influence the witnesses. He further submitted that the petitioner has approached this Court and filed Crl.P.No.6706 of 2025 seeking anticipatory bail and the same was dismissed by this court on 12.06.2025 and the now the petitioner again approached this Court and filed the present criminal petition with very same grounds and hence the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail and prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the learne