Dismissed¶27

M Sankar Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Mar 2026CRLP/1660/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court (Amaravati), Dr. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, Criminal Petition No.1660 of 2026, decided 09.03.2026: anticipatory bail denied under Section 482 BNSS 2023 to M. Sankar Reddy, Accused No.4 in Crime No.205/2025, Gangavaram Urban Police Station, Chittoor District (attempt/abetment-type offences under Sections 109(1), 118(1), 115(2) r/w 3(5) BNS 2023); petition dismissed; petitioner to surrender and seek regular bail. Counsel: Medapati Santosh Reddy for petitioner; Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, Assistant Public Prosecutor, for the State.

What did the court decide?

None granted; petitioner directed to surrender before the concerned Court and move a regular bail application, which the learned Judge may dispose of according to law expeditiously. ¶27

M Sankar Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Anticipatory Bail | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

[3396]

¶2

APHC010108252026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF MARCH

¶5

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1660/2026

¶9

Between:

¶10

M SANKAR REDDY, S/O LATE M. VENKAT REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O B. JARRAVARIPALLE, H/O KELLAPATIA,GANGAVARAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI.

¶14

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

¶16

1.MEDAPATI SANTOSH REDDY

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

¶18

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶20

The instant petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed seeking to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner, in connection with Crime No.205 of 2025 on the file of Gangavaram Urban Police Station, Chittoor District which is registered for the offence under Section 109(1), 118(1) and 115(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶21

2. Sri Medapati Santosh Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner / Accused No.4 would submit that the Petitioner did not commit any offence

¶22

¶23

as alleged and the Petitioner is falsely implicated in the present crime. It is submitted that the Petitioner is ready to furnish the sureties to the satisfaction of the Court.

¶24

3. Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that there are specific allegations against the Petitioner and that no case is made out to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner.

¶25

4. Considering the submissions made and on a perusal of the material on record, the nature of the offence alleged against the Petitioner, this Court

¶26

is of the view there are no grounds to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner.

¶27

5. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. The Petitioner shall surrender before the concerned Court and move a regular bail application.

¶28

On filing such application, the learned Judge may pass appropriate orders according to law as expeditiously as possible.

¶29

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

¶30

________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA