Anumalasetty Subbarao alias Anamalasetti Subbarao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶2

rPRESENT:

¶3

HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶4

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1257 OF 2026

¶5

Between:

¶6

Anumalasetty Subbarao @ Anamalasetti Subbarao, S/o A Raghavalu, Aged about 60 years, R/o D.No.31-09-10, Velpuru Road, Tanuku, West Godavari District.

¶7

Anumalasetty Bharatha Lakshmi?9Jias Anamalasetti^{BarataLakshmi} W/o A Subbarao, Aged about 58 years, R/o D.No.31-09-10, Velpuru Road, Tanuku, West Godavari District ;:

¶8

Petitioners/Accused No.2 & 3

¶9

t AND

¶10

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Pubic

¶11

Prosecutor, Through S.H.O, Kakinada 11 Town Police Station, Kakinada District

¶12

\ ■■ Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 and Under^section438 of Cr.P.C is filed praying that in the cireumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioners/Accused No.2 & 3, on bail in the event of their Arrestⁱⁿ Crime No. 17 of 2026, on the file of Kakinada II Tovyn Police Station,^{KakinadaDistrict.}

¶13

The petition/Appeal coming on fqrKhearing, upon perusing^{thePetitionand} the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of KARRE SATYANANDAM Advocate for the Petitioners PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent and the Court made the following.

ORDER

7

3

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1257/2026

¶18

ORDER:

¶19

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, “the BNSS”) by^{thePetitioners/Accused} Nos.2 and 3 seeking grant of pre-arrest bail in connection^{withFIRNo.17of} 2026, dated 02.02.2026, registered on the file of Kakinada II Town Police Station, Kakinada District, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 85 and 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “the BNS”) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

¶20

Heard Sri K. Satyanandam, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mrs. K. Lakshmi Priyanka, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

¶21

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the de-facto complainant reported that her daughter, Anamala Venkata Surya Lakshmi Deepthi, aged about 36 years, was married to A-1 Anamala Jagadeesh Kumar in the year 2014. At the time of marriage, the complainant and her husband allegedly gave dowry and performed the marriage in a grand manner. Subsequently, A- 1 allegedly incurred debts and started harassing the deceased both physically and mentally to bring additional money from her parents^{toclearhisdebts,} it is further alleged that in the year 2018 the deceased attempted suicide due to the harassment of her husband. Again in November, 2025, A-1 allegedly harassed her physically and mentally demanding money^toclear his debts.

¶22

4

¶23

When the complainant and her husband questioned the in-laws of the deceased about such harassment, A-2 and A-3, who are the parents of A-1, allegedly supported A-1 and also demanded money. Thereafter, the complainant and her husband brought their daughter^{backtoKakinada.On} 02.02.2026 at about 12:00 noon, while the complainant’s husband had gone to his shop, the deceased allegedly committed suicide by hanging herself with a chunni to the ceiling fan at her parents’ house due^{tocontinuousharassment} by her husband and in-laws. Based on the report of the informant, the police registered the above crime.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners herein are Accused Nos.2 and 3, who are the parents^{ofAccusedNo.1} and the parents-in-law of the deceased. He would further submit that the petitioners are old-aged persons suffering from several health issues and they are residents of Tanuku. He would further submits that petitioners never resided with the deceased and A-1 under the same roof. He further submits that the deceased and A-1 were residing at Varanasi due to the employment of A-1 and that the deceased had left the company of^{herhusbandandhad} been staying at her parents’ house since November, 2025. While so, she committed suicide on 02.02.2026, nearly four months later, at her parents’ house. The marriage between the deceased and A-1 took place in the year 2014. It is contended that the allegations against the petitioners are general in nature and do not attract the ingredients of the offence^{underSection108of}

¶25

5

¶26

the BNS. The other offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment for less than seven years. The petitioners are ready to^{furnishsuretiesandabide} by any conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays that the petition be allowed.

¶27

On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioners are the parents-in-law of the deceased and that there are allegations against them that they harassed the deceased for additional dowry. She further submits that the investigation is still in progress and therefore prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶28

Considering the submissions made on either side and on perusal of the material placed on record, this Court finds that the petitioners are the parents of A-1 and are stated to be aged persons. The deceased committed suicide^at her parents’ house after she had been residing there^{foraboutfourmonths} prior to the incident. At this stage, the allegations against the petitioners appear to be general in nature. Further, the main part of the investigation appears to have been completed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner by following conditions:

¶29

i) In the event of arrest of the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 in connection with Crime No. 17 of 2026 of Kakinada II Town Police Station, Kakinada District, they shall be released on

¶30

6

¶31

bail by executing a self-bond for Rs.20,000/- each (Rupees Twenty Thousand only each) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Kakinada.

¶32

ii) On release, the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3, shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, once in a week ie., on every Saturday between 10;00 AM and 05:00 PM, till filing of the charge-sheet.

¶33

iii) The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall appear^before the Investigating Officer as and when required and cooperate with the investigation.

¶34

iv) The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall not directly or indirectly induce, threatened or influence any witness acquainted with the facts of the case.

¶35

v) The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall not tamper^with the prosecution evidence in any manner.

¶36

vi) The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall not leave Andhra Pradesh without prior permission of the Court concerned. vii) The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3, shall surrender their passports, if any, to the investigating officer. If they claims that

¶37

7

¶38

7

¶39

they do not have passport, they shall submit an affidavit to that

¶40

effect to the Court concerned.

¶41

In the event of violation of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.

¶42

It is also made clear that the observations made in this order are only for the purpose of deciding the bail application and they^{shallnotbeconstrued} as opinion on the merits of the Crime.

¶43

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in

¶44

this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

¶45

SD/-B.CHITT! JOSEPH DEPUTY REG STRAR //TRUE COPY// 4-. SECTION OFFICER

¶46

To,

¶47