The court ruled that anticipatory bail was not warranted due to the seriousness of the charges 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.3 in Crime No.555 of 2024 of KUC Police Station, Warangal District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109 and 308(5) r/w Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha , 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 09.11.2024 at about 10:30 hours, the de facto complainant lodged a complaint stating that his brother- Rajesh (injured 1) is working as a swiggy delivery boy and on 08.11.2024 midnight at 00:20 hours, the injured along with a friend- Vynala Tejas Kumar (injured 2) delivered the biryani ordered by a female customer and while the customer was making payment through phonepay, the husband of the customer (accused No.1), came out and on suspicion that the injured 1 and injured 2 were taking photographs of his wife, snatched the mobile phone of injured 2 and accused Nos.1 and 2 along with others beat them with sticks as a result of which, injured 1 received bleeding injuries on his head, nose, ear, mouth and other body parts and became unconscious and injured 2 also received bleeding injuries on his body and both the injured were shifted to MGM Hospital for treatment. Basing on the said complaint, the aforesaid crime was registered against the petitioner/accused No.3 and other accused for the aforesaid offences.

3. Heard Mr. G.Sanjeev Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.3 and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1/State.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the above crime. He further submits that even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the main allegations are levelled against the other accused and the petitioner was not present at the alleged scene of offence and as such, the ingredients of Section 109 of BNS are not attracted against the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is doing private employment and eking out his livelihood and he has no criminal antecedents and prays for grant of anticipatory bail as he is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by the conditions as may be imposed by this Court.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner and other accused have committed grave offence and injured 1 and injured 2 sustained grievous injuries in the hands of the petitioner and other accused and the same can be seen from the medical report issued by the MGM Hospital, Warangal. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submits that the investigation is at the threshold and at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the material available on record including the medical report issued by the MGM Hospital, Warangal, it reveals that injured 1 and injured 2 sustained grievous injuries. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the investigation is under progress.

7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the gravity of offence alleged against the petitioner/accused No.3, especially as the investigation is under progress, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him.