Allapaka Srinivasulu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Anticipatory Bail | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

Allapaka Srinivasulu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Anticipatory Bail | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Pre-arrest bail granted: petitioners-accused Nos. 4 to 8 to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting police officials, subject to conditions: making themselves available for investigation as and when required; not causing any threat, inducement or promise to prosecution witnesses; appearing before the Station House Officer concerned once a week i.e. every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till filing of the charge sheet; not leaving the district limits without express permission of the Station House Officer concerned; and surrendering passports (or filing an affidavit of non-possession) to the Investigating Officer.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners-accused Nos. 4 to 8 are entitled to be enlarged on pre-arrest bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. 177 of 2025 of Muttukur Police Station, registered under Section 109(1) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. +1 more

Court's answer

The names of the petitioners were not found in the FIR and were brought on record only after the confessional statement of accused No. 1 recorded by the police in their custody.

Ratio / Principle

Mere C.D.Rs. between the petitioners and accused No. 1 are not conclusive proof that they conspired together and attacked the de facto complainant.

Key takeaways

Considering the facts and circumstances, the gravity and nature of the allegations, and that the petitioners' names surfaced only through accused No. 1's custodial confessional statement, the Court was inclined to enlarge the petitioners on pre-arrest bail in the event of their arrest.ratio¶25
No adverse antecedents were reported against the petitioners.ratio¶29
As of now, the only material on record against the petitioners is the confessional statement of accused No. 1 recorded in police custody.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition No. 7912 of 2025 (High Court of A.P., Amaravati; Dr Justice Y. Lakshmana R; 29-08-2025) - Pre-arrest bail under S.482, BNSS 2023 sought by Accused Nos. 4-8 in Crime No. 177/2025 of Muttukur Police Station, SPSR Nellore District (S.109(1) r/w 3(5), BNS 2023), arising from an attack on a T.D.P. functionary amid political rivalry with a YSRCP supporter. Petitioners' names were absent from the FIR and entered the case only through accused No. 1's confessional statement recorded in police custody (custody on 12-07-2025; mediatornama of even date silent on the magistrate's permission; accused No. 1's statement to the magistrate on 13-07-2025 alleging presence of T.D.P. persons and threats during interrogation). Court held mere C.D.Rs. between petitioners and accused No. 1 inconclusive of conspiracy; noted no adverse antecedents and that the victim had been discharged from hospital; observed that the validity of the custodial confession falls for examination under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 during trial. Petition allowed: bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties for the like sum, subject to conditions including weekly Saturday appearance before the SHO till charge sheet, no exit from district limits without SHO permission, availability for investigation, no tampering with witnesses, and surrender of passports.