Dismissed¶34

Maddireddy Kondreddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Mar 2026CRLP/1586/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati, 05.03.2026, Criminal Petition No. 1586 of 2026 (Dr. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa): anticipatory bail sought under BNSS Ss.438/482(1) by A.2 in Crime No.114 of 2022, I Town PS Madanapalle (Ss.420 and 506 read with 34 IPC; alleged land-document fraud at A.Rangampet, Chandragiri Mandal, Tirupathi District). FIR discloses cognizable offences; investigation nascent; civil disputes pending; criminal antecedents cited; anticipatory bail refused, petition dismissed, misc petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Petition is not maintainable at this stage: the FIR discloses cognizable offences and the investigation is at a nascent stage. ¶33

Maddireddy Kondreddy Vs The State of Andhra… — Cheating and Forgery | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner (A.2) is entitled to anticipatory bail / release in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.114 of 2022 of I Town Police Station, Madanapalle, registered for offences under Sections 420 and 506 read with 34 IPC. +1 more

¶23

Court's answer

There are admittedly civil disputes pending between the parties.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

The Criminal Petition is not maintainable at this stage: the FIR discloses cognizable offences and the investigation is at a nascent stage.

¶33

Key takeaways

The allegations disclose ingredients of criminal offences against the petitioner.ratio¶33
The validity, genuineness and manner of acquisition of the subject document are disputed questions of fact.ratio¶33
This Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail refused. Criminal Petition under Section 438/482(1) of the BNSS filed by Maddireddy Kondreddy (A.2) seeking release on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.114 of 2022 of I Town Police Station, Madanapalle, Annamayya District, registered for offences under Sections 420 and 506 read with 34 IPC, arising from alleged obtaining of the complainant's signatures while he was in an alcohol condition on land documents of Survey Nos.207/3, 230, 239/1B, 231 of A.Rangampet, Chandragiri Mandal, Tirupathi District and registration of the land in the accuseds' names. Held: the petition is not maintainable at this stage as the FIR discloses cognizable offences and the investigation is at a nascent stage; civil disputes are admittedly pending between the parties; the allegations disclose ingredients of criminal offences against the petitioner; the validity, genuineness and manner of acquisition of the subject document are disputed questions of fact; and, considering the petitioner's criminal antecedents and the attributions leveled against him, no case is made out to grant anticipatory bail at this stage. The Criminal Petition is dismissed and miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, are to stand closed.

¶1

APHC010104242026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

[3396]

¶5

THURSDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1586/2026

¶7

Between:

¶8

MADDIREDDY KONDREDDY, S/O.M.MAL REDDY, AGED 53 YEARSR/O.D.NO.6-155, VISWANATHA STREETTHAMBALLAPALLE MANDALANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, AP

¶9

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶10

AND

¶11

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court of A.P., Amaravati

¶12

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶13

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 direct the Station House Officer, Madanapalle I Town Police Station, Madanapalle, Annamayya District Andhra Pradesh to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with FIR No.114/2022 and pass

¶14

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶15

Petition under Section 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 may be pleased May be pleased to permit the Petitioner/respondent to implead as respondent No.2 in Criminal Petition No. 1586 of 2026 and to pass

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

¶17

1.D KODANDARAMI REDDY

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

¶19

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶20

¶21

The Court made the following:

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

Criminal Petition under Section 438/482(1) of the Bharatiyana Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS.’), has been filed by the Petitioner / A.2 seeking to release him on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.114 of 2022 of I Town Police Station, Madanapalle, Annamayya District, which is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506 read with 34 IPC.

¶24

Brief facts of the case, as per the contents of the First Information Report, are that on 18.06.2022 while the complainant was in alcohol condition, A. 1 to A.6 obtained his signatures on the documents pertaining to the land situated in Survey Nos.207/3, 230, 239/1B, 231 of A.Rangampet, Chandragiri Mandal, Tirupathi District and registered the land in the names of the Accused. Later the complainant came to know about the fraudulent act of cheating of the Accused applied for encumbrance certificate and basing on the same, on 18.05.2022 the complainant lodged a complaint against the Accused 1 to 6 which is registered as a case in Crime No.114 of 2022 of I Town Police Station, Madanapalle. The Petitioner/A.2 filed the present Criminal Petition seeking bail in the event of his arrest.

¶25

Heard Sri D.Kodandarami Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Smt.K.Priyanka Lakshmi learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent State. Perused the material on record.

¶26

Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the de facto complainant has sold the subject property to Petitioner(A.2), A.4 and A.5 for a valuable consideration on 21.10.2019 by executing a registered sale deed in their

¶27

¶28

favour. Learned counsel would further submit that the Tahsildar, Chandragiri has issued 1-B Adangal in respect of the subject property in favour of the Petitioner and two others. Petitioner and the two others are the bona fide purchasers of the subject property by paying a valuable consideration to the complainant and thereafter they developed the property. But the registered sale deed was executed in favour of the Petitioner and two others. Learned counsel would further submit that the ingredients of the offences of cheating which is lodged against the petitioner would not attract against the Petitioner and that there is an inordinate delay of two years seven months in filing the complaint against the petitioner and others for which there is no plausible explanation. Learned counsel would further submit that with the active support of inimical persons, the present false case has been lodged against the Petitioner and that there is no specific overtact against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that any conditions may be imposed on the petitioner to the satisfaction of the Court. Hence, prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the Petitioner.

¶29

On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor placed on record the proceedings dated 27.12.2022 issued by the Collector and District Magistrate, Annamayya District and on instructions would submit that Petitioner is shown as Accused No.2 in the subject crime and that he is the habitual offender and that he is in habit of creating fake and false documents with a view to occupy the lands illegally and that if the petitioner released on bail, there is every possibility of committing similar offences by creating annoyance in the public. Further, investigation is not yet completed and that there are civil suits pending before

¶30

the competent Civil Courts with regard to the subject property. There are no

¶31

¶32

grounds to the grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner at this stage. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition.

¶33

Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material on record, as rightly put by learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the petition is not maintainable, as the FIR discloses cognizable offences and the investigation is at a nascent stage. Admittedly, there are civil disputes pending between the parties. The allegations disclose ingredients of criminal offences against the Petitioner. The validity, genuineness and manner of acquisition of the subject document are in disputed questions of fact. Having considered the rival submissions and upon perusal of the material on record, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage. In view of the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and the attributions leveled against the petitioner, no case is made out to grant anticipatory bail at this stage. This criminal petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶34

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.

¶35

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand

¶36

closed.

¶37

Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶38

05.03.2026 Mjl/*

¶39

¶40