Dismissed¶¶28

Kumpati Siva Kumar Reddy Alias Siva Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Pre-arrest bail – Maintainability

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Jul 2026CRLP/4872/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AP High Court, Amaravati; Criminal Petition No.4872 of 2026; Dr Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao; decided 02.07.2026. Anticipatory bail under S.482 CrPC / S.528 BNSS for Accused Nos.1-2 in FIR 66/2026, Railway Kodur Urban PS (S.318(4) r/w 3(5) BNS 2023) DISMISSED as not maintainable: S.35(3) BNSS notice already issued, no imminent apprehension of arrest. IO to follow S.35 BNSS procedure; compromise-pressure allegation is a separate cause of action, not a ground for bail.

What did the court decide?

Since the Investigating Officer has already issued a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS requiring the petitioners to cooperate with the investigation, there is, as of now, no reasonable apprehension that the petitioners will be arrested and remanded to judicial custody. ¶¶26

Kumpati Siva Kumar Reddy Alias Siva Reddy Vs The… — Cheating and Forgery | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the application for pre-arrest (anticipatory) bail under Section 482 CrPC / Section 528 BNSS is maintainable where a notice under Section 35(3) BNSS has already been issued and there is no imminent apprehension of arrest. +1 more

¶¶25

Court's answer

¶¶26

Ratio / Principle

In the absence of any imminent apprehension of arrest, the pre-arrest bail application is not maintainable, and the criminal petition is dismissed.

¶¶28

Key takeaways

An allegation that the Investigating Officer is pressurising the parties to arrive at a compromise, if true, constitutes a distinct cause of action for which the petitioners may avail such remedy as per law; such allegation, by itself, cannot be a ground for grant of anticipatory bail.obiter¶¶27
The petitioners shall continue to cooperate with the investigation as and when required in terms of the notice issued under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, and the Investigating Officer shall strictly adhere to the procedure prescribed under Section 35 of the BNSS; if any offence punishable with imprisonment beyond seven years is noticed, the investigating officer may proceed in accordance with law.obiter¶¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Pre-arrest bail — Maintainability — Notice under Section 35(3) BNSS. Petitioners, Accused Nos.1 and 2 in FIR No.66 of 2026 (Railway Kodur Urban Police Station, Tirupati District), registered for alleged offences punishable under Sections 318(4) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC / Section 528 BNSS. The Court noted that the Investigating Officer had already issued a notice under Section 35(3) BNSS requiring the petitioners to cooperate with the investigation, so no reasonable apprehension of arrest and judicial remand presently existed. Held: in the absence of any imminent apprehension of arrest, the application is not maintainable and is dismissed. The petitioners were directed to continue cooperating with the investigation per the Section 35(3) notice, the Investigating Officer to strictly follow Section 35 BNSS procedure, with liberty to proceed per law if any offence attracting imprisonment beyond seven years emerges. An allegation of pressure on the parties to compromise, even if true, constitutes a distinct cause of action actionable separately and cannot by itself justify anticipatory bail. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed.

¶1

[3521]

¶2

Date of reserved for orders :

¶3

Date of pronouncement :02.07.2026 Date of uploading :08.07.2026

¶4

APHC010307522026

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶6

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶7

THURSDAY, THE 2^nd DAY OF JULY 2026

¶8

PRESENT

¶9

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶10

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4872/2026

¶11

Between:

¶12

KUMPATI SIVA KUMAR REDDY ALIAS SIVA REDDY, , S/O. K.CHENGAL REDDYAGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS,.R/O. CHIYYAVARAM VENKATAREDDY PALLI, RAILWAY KODUR MANDAL,TIRUPATI DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT TIRUPATI.

¶13

KASIREDDY CHANDRAKALA, , W/O. VENKATA REDDY,AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE,R/O. NADIMPALLI VILLAGE, PANAGALURU MANDAL,TIRUPATI DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 107,MAHALAKSHMI ESTATE, RAJIV NAGAR, HYDERABAD.

¶14

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

¶15

AND

¶16

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

¶17

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶18

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 Courtpleased to direct release of the petitioners on bail in the event of their Arrest in connection with Crime (FIR).No. 66 of 2026 dated.28.03.2026 of Railway Kodur Urban Police Station, Tirupati District, pending enquiry and trial, and pass

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

¶20

1.SHAIK MEERAVALI

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

¶22

¶23

The Court made the following:

¶24

ORDER :

¶25

The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.,’)/Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) seeking to grant pre-arrest bail to the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 2 in FIR No.66 of 2026 of Railway Kodur Urban Police Station, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections318(4) read with 3(5)of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’).

¶26

Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, and also submitted by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, that the Investigating Officer has already issued a notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), requiring the petitioners to cooperate with the investigation. In view of the issuance of the said notice, as of now, there is, no reasonable apprehension that the petitioners will be arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioners further contends that the Investigating Officer is pressurising the parties to arrive at a compromise. If such allegations are true, they constitute a distinct cause of action, for which the petitioners are at liberty to avail such remedy as per law. The said allegation, by itself, cannot be a ground for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶28

Accordingly, in the absence of any imminent apprehension of arrest, the present application is not maintainable and is, therefore, dismissed.

¶29

However, the petitioners shall continue to cooperate with the investigation as and when required in terms of the notice issued under Section 35(3) of the BNSS. The Investigating Officer shall strictly adhere to the procedure prescribed under Section 35 of the BNSS. If it is noticed in the course of investigation that the Petitioners have committed any offence which is punishable with imprisonment beyond seven years, the investigating officer is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

¶30

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

¶31

DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

¶32

Date: 02.07.2026 JLSR

¶33

Whether the order is:

¶34

Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

¶35

273