Allowed

Raja alias Peram Raju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Sept 2026CRLP/7624/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh allowed the second bail petition of the accused, convicted of grievous injury related offences under the BNS. Despite adverse antecedents and ongoing investigation, bail was granted subject to stringent conditions including police reporting, passport surrender, and bonding.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner/Accused No.5 is enlarged on bail subject to bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties, periodic reporting, no travel outside AP, no new offences, cooperation with IO, and surrender of passport.

Raja alias Peram Raju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Bail and Remand | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

APHC010457242026

¶2

[3521]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

TUESDAY, THE 15^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7624/2026

¶9

Between:

¶10

RAJA ALIAS PERAM RAJU, S/O LAKSHUMAIAH,AGED 34 YEARS, OCC PVT. EMPLOYEE,R/O. D.NO.16/119, LAKSHMI NAGAR,CHENNURTOWN, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh,At Amaravati

¶14

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

¶16

1.D PURNACHANDRA REDDY

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

¶18

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶20

Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.5 on bail in Crime No.32 of 2026 of Kadapa

¶21

Taluk U/G Police Station, YSR Kadapa District, registered for the alleged

¶22

¶23

offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 118(1) and 109 read with 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNS’).

¶24

Mr.D.Purnachandra Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, therefore, his incarceration would cause undue hardship to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is urged to allow the Petition.

¶25

Per contra , Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the Petitioner is released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law and urged to dismiss the Petition.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

¶27

On perusal of the record, the Petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.5 in this case. This Court, in Crl.P.No.6540 of 2026, vide order dated 18.08.2026, dismissed the first bail application filed by the Petitioner/Accused No.5. The present application is the second bail application. The grievous injury was

¶28

¶29

caused to the victim/de ‑ facto complainant by Accused No.8. The Petitioner was arrested on 06.07.2026 pursuant to the execution of a PT warrant and has been in judicial custody for the past 71 days. The charge sheet has not yet been filed.

¶30

There are altogether 11 adverse antecedents reported against the Petitioner, of which six cases ended in acquittal and five cases are still pending. The Petitioner is a permanent resident of Chennur Town, YSR Kadapa District. He has got fixed abode. If the Petitioner is enlarged on bail subject to stringent conditions, there is no likelihood of his interfering with the investigation, threatening witnesses, or tampering with evidence.

¶31

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the Petitioner/Accused No.5, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.5 on bail subject to stringent conditions.

¶32

In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following stringent conditions:

¶33

i. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall be enlarged on bail subject to him executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kadapa.

¶34

ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till filing of the charge sheet.

¶35

¶36

iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall not leave the limits of the Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned.

¶37

iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required.

¶38

vi. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court. vii. The Petitioner/Accused No.5 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer.

¶39

_________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

¶40

Date: 15.09.2026 PRA/VMM

¶41

¶42

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶43

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7624 of 2026

¶44

Date: 15.09.2026 PRA/VMM

Raja alias Peram Raju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja alias Peram Raju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases