Boggu Naganji Alias Naganjaneyulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh

Dr Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao, J

The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.6 on bail in Cr.No.319 of 2025 of J.Madugu Police Station, Y.S.R.District, registered against the petitioner/Accused No.6 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 191(1), 191 (3), 115 (2), 118 (1), 109 (1), 103 read with 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’)

The case of the prosecution is that on 10.05.2025, at about 3:30 P.M., a dispute arose between the accused and the de-facto complainant regarding the sprinkling of dung water in front of their houses. In connection with this dispute, Accused Nos. 1 to 8 formed an unlawful assembly, armed with sticks, and attacked the deceased, the de-facto complainant, and six of their relatives, causing severe bleeding injuries. The injured were shifted to the Government Hospital, Jammalamadugu. While the deceased was being shifted to Hyderabad for better treatment, he succumbed to the injuries on the way the deceased was died. Based on the complaint, a case was registered, and Accused No. 6 was remanded to judicial custody on 23.05.2025.

Sri M. Siva Prasad, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence; he is falsely implicated in this case; he is the sole breadwinner of his family; he is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the galata, the petitioner also suffered a head injury and underwent treatment at Hari Kishore Neuro, Spine & E.N.T. Care, Proddatur; to that effect, a doctor’s certificate is appended. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is also a victim in the galata and has been suffering from a neuro problem in the Sub-Jail, Jammalamadugu, for the past 60 days, and it is urged to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Per contra, Ms. P. Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed the grant of bail, stating that some more material witnesses have to be examined; the investigation is not yet completed; and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may not be available for investigation and may escape from the clutches of law. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor further submits that there are three injured in this case who suffered grievous injuries; one Raja Chowdappa sustained fatal injuries and was admitted to the hospital on 10.05.2025 and died on 11.05.2025 while undergoing treatment. The petitioner/Accused No.6 is the main perpetrator, and it is urged to dismiss the bail application.

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

As seen from the case record, the petitioner is shown as Accused No.6 in the FIR. The allegation levelled against him is that he also beat the deceased and the injured persons with his hands and legs. The petitioner was arrested on 23.05.2025 and he has been in judicial custody for the past 60 days. It is reported that the petitioner suffered a head injury in the galata. He is aged about 28 years and is suffering from a severe neuro problem due to the injury sustained during the galata.

Considering the gravity and nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, the alleged role played by him, the relatively mild overt acts attributed to him, and the period of detention already undergone by him in judicial custody, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the petitioner on bail with certain stringent conditions.

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

i. The petitioner/Accused No.6 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Jammalamadugu.

ii. The petitioner/Accused No.6 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Investigating Officer till the filing of the charge sheet.

iii. The petitioner/Accused No.6 shall not commit or indulge in similar offences in future.

iv. The petitioner/Accused No.6 shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses;

iv. The petitioner/Accused No.6 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall be available to the investigating officer as and when called by him.