Dismissed

Morla Lavanya v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Sept 2026CRLP/7858/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed a bail petition filed by Morla Lavanya, accused of attacking her husband with a crowbar causing grievous injuries under Sections 109(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner had been in judicial custody for 53 days. The court found no merit in granting bail given the gravity of the allegations, the pending investigation, and the awaited wound certificate.

What the court decided

AI extract

Morla Lavanya Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Bail and Remand | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

[3521]

¶2

APHC010468522026

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE 16^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7858/2026

¶9

Between:

¶10

MORLA LAVANYA, W/O. SURESH,AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFER/O. VUYYURAVARI PALEM VILLAGE, NAGARAM MANDAL BAPATLA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶11

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.1

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep, by the Public Prosecutor,High Court of AP, Amaravathi-522239

¶14

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

¶16

1.KALLA TULASI DURGAMBA

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

¶18

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶20

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 Petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail in Cr.No.52 of 2026 on the file of

¶21

¶22

Nagaram Police Station, Bapatla District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Section 109(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’).

¶23

Mrs.Kalla Tulasi Durgamba, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is a female aged about 35 years. She has a daughter studying Intermediate and a son studying in 10th class. The de ‑ facto complainant wanted divorce, but the Petitioner refused to cooperate with the husband for grant of divorce. It is further submitted that the de ‑ facto complainant has not suffered any severe or serious injuries. The Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. She is innocent, a law ‑ abiding citizen, and got fixed abode. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions that this Court may impose while granting bail. Hence, it is urged to allow the Criminal Petition.

¶24

Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner. He submits that the Petitioner, being the wife of the de ‑ facto complainant, attacked him with a crowbar and caused severe injuries. The wound certificate is awaited. The investigation is still at a progressive stage. Hence, it is urged to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

¶25

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

¶26

¶27

On perusal of the record, the Petitioner was arrested on 25.07.2026. She has been judicial custody for the past 53 days. The Petitioner is a female aged about 35 years. The de ‑ facto complainant has alleged that the Petitioner maintained an extra ‑ marital relationship with one Krishna Prasad and with the intention of doing away with the life of the de ‑ facto complainant, caused grievous injuries to the de ‑ facto complainant with a crowbar on vital parts of his body. The investigation is still at a progressive stage. So far, seven witnesses have been examined, and some more material witnesses remain to be examined. The wound certificate is also awaited.

¶28

Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the Petitioner/Accused No.1, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail at this juncture, inasmuch as the investigation is still pending. This Court finds no merits in the case for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

¶29

In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

¶30

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

¶31

_________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

¶32

Date: 16.09.2026 PRA/VMM

¶33

¶34

¶35

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶36

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7858 of 2026

¶37

Date: 16.09.2026 PRA/VMM

Morla Lavanya v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Morla Lavanya v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases