Dismissed

V Satish v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Sept 2026CRLP/7734/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed a criminal petition seeking bail for two accused charged with offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, holding that no change in circumstances existed to warrant relief after prior applications were rejected.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition dismissed. Under-trial prisoners directed to remain in custody. Trial Court directed to expedite trial and submit report within one year.

V Satish Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Bail and Remand | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

[3521]

¶2

APHC010463172026

¶3

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

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 15^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7734/2026

¶7

Between:

¶8

V SATISH, SON OF VELU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCC PVT EMPLOYEE,RESIDENT OF PERIYAVATTU VILLAGE, TADA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶9

V VIGNESH, SON OF VELU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC PVT EMPLOYEE,RESIDENT OF PERIYAVATTU VILLAGE, TADA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. By Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi,Pin 522239

¶13

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

¶15

MADAMALA VENKATESWARLU

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

¶17

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶18

¶19

Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.7734 of 2026 Dated 15.09.2026

¶20

The Court made the following:

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

The 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 Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 on bail in Crime No.33 of 2026 of Tada Police Station, Tirupati District, registered against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’).

¶23

Mr.M.Venkateswarlu, the learned counsel for the Petitioners, submits that the Petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. They have not committed any offence. They are the sole earning members of the family. They are lawabiding citizens. They have got fixed abode. The Petitioners undertake to abide by any conditions that this Court may impose while granting bail to the Petitioners. Hence, it is urged to allow the petition.

¶24

Per contra , Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners and submitted that, though the charge sheet has already been filed, the accusations against the petitioners are well founded. Hence, he prayed that the Criminal Petition be dismissed.

¶25

¶26

Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.7734 of 2026 Dated 15.09.2026

¶27

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

¶28

As seen from the record, this is the third bail application filed by Accused No.3 and the second bail application filed by Accused No.2. This Court, in Crl.P.Nos.4790 and 6083 of 2026, filed by Accused No.3, vide orders dated 29.06.2026 and 04.08.2026, dismissed the first and second bail applications filed by him. This Court, in Crl.P.No.6090 of 2026, vide order dated 29.07.2026, dismissed the first bail application filed by Accused No.2. After thorough investigation, the charge sheet has been filed. The accusations against the petitioners are well founded. The petitioners were arrested on 04.03.2026 and have been in judicial custody for the past 195 days. There are no adverse antecedents reported against the petitioners. The petitioners are permanent residents of Tirupati District and they have got fixed abode.

¶29

Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3, and in view of the fact that there is no change in the circumstances from the date of dismissal of the first and second bail applications till the filing of the present (third) bail application, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 on bail at this juncture. Hence, this Court finds no merit in the Criminal Petition. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶30

¶31

Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.7734 of 2026 Dated 15.09.2026

¶32

In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Since the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 are under-trial prisoners, the learned Trial Court concerned is directed to expedite the trial and submit a report to the Registrar (Judicial) within a period of one year.

¶33

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

¶34

_________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

¶35

Date: 15.09.2026 RSI/DRNR

¶36

¶37

Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.7734 of 2026 Dated 15.09.2026

¶38

¶39

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶40

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7734 of 2026

¶41

Date: 15.09.2026 RSI/DRNR

V Satish v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V Satish 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