Morapulla Bayamma vs State Of Andhra Pradesh

Tuhin Kumar Gedela, J

Heard,

Sri Veladi Sai Sri Harsha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the Respondent-State.

The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by the petitioner/Accused No.2 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.82 of 2025 of Penugranchiprolu Police Station, NTR District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The case of the prosecution is that the deceased and her husband were eking out their livelihood by doing coolie works. While so, the accused No.1 was stalking the deceased since four months and used to misbehave with her at the work place. On 16.04.2025, at about 10.00 a.m., the accused No.2, who is the wife of the accused No.1, called the deceased over phone to her house for the purpose of talking with the deceased. Thereafter, at about 12.00 noon on the same day, the deceased consumed Herbicide Poison (ROGOR) and immediately she was admitted at Government Hospital, Nandigama, wherein the doctor referred the deceased to the G.G.H, Vijayawada for better treatment. While undergoing the treatment, the deceased died. Hence, the FIR.

Sri Veladi Sai Sri Harsha, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated by the police. He further contended that the remaining accused in Cr.No.82 of 2025, were released on bail by the Court below. The petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In the light of the foregoing submissions, learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice.

Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest 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 pre-arrest bail, there is a strong likelihood that she may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law, and urged to dismiss the petition.

As seen from the record, the allegation against the petitioner/Accused No.2 is that she contacted the deceased over phone and asked her to come to her home for the purpose of talking. Further, it is observed that the accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 have filed Crl.M.P.No.433 of 2025 in Cr.No.82 of 2025, on the file of the XVI Additional Sessions Judge, Nandigama, under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail, wherein the Court below vide its order dated 06.06.2025, granted bail and released the Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 on bail by imposing conditions.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity and nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner and the alleged role played by her in this case, this Court deems it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

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

i. In the event of her arrest, the petitioner/Accused No.2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to her executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jaggaiahpet;

ii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall attend before the S.H.O of Penugranchiprolu Police Station on every Tuesday between 9.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m., for eight weeks;

iii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall provide a copy of her Aadhar Card and her phone number to the Police;

iv. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall inform the Police, if there is any change in her phone number or her address.

v. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall be available on phone on all reasonable times.

vi. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not contact either the informant or any of the witnesses or their respective family members.

vii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not interfere with the process of investigation and she shall cooperate with the investigating agency in conducting investigation.