S.sridevi

In the court of the IV Additional District & Sessions Judge :: Tanuku

Present: Smt. Sunkara Sridevi IV Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Tanuku

Monday, the 11th (Eleventh) day of May, 2026

CIS No.20/2026

Crl.M.P.No. 88 of 2026

Cr.No. 49 of 2026 of Attili P.S.,

Between:-

1. Kalyanam Durga Rao, S/o Mahalakshmudu, aged 33 years, D.No.1- 85, Skinnerapuram Village of Attili Mandal.

2. Kalyanam Venkamma, W/o Mahalakshmudu, aged 49 years, D.No.1- 85, Skinnerapuram village, Attili mandal, West Godavari District.

… Petitioners/A1 and A2

And

The SHO., Attili Police Station. Represented by its Public Prosecutor … Respondent/ Complainant

This petition is coming on 11.05.2026 for hearing before me, in the presence of Sri G.N.V.S.Ch.Y.Prasad, Advocate for petitioners/A1 and A2 and of Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/complainant. Upon hearing the arguments on both sides and other material papers on record, this Court made the following:-

O R D E R

This is 2nd bail application filed U/sec.483 B.N.S to grant regular bail to the petitioners/Accused 1 and 2, to release them who were arrested in connection with the case in Cr.No.49/2026 of Attili P.S., for the offences punishable U/Sections 85 and 108 r/w 3(5) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha 2023.

2

2. The circumstances give rise to file this application are as follows:

The father of the deceased by name Kalyanam Naga Lakshmi presented a report before the SHO of Attili PS on 23.03.2026 contending that the marriage of his daughter with A1 was performed on 31.03.2018 and they blessed with two children and for the past 4 years, the deceased was subjected to physical and mental harassment by her husband/A1 and mother-in-law/A2 with a demand to arrange additional dowry and house property. On 23.03.2026 in the early hours, a dispute arose between the deceased and A1 due to which, the deceased committed suicide and the report was registered as Cr.No.49/2026 under Sections 85 and 108 r/w 3(5) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha 2023 and the investigation is on.

3.The case of the petitioners in brief is that the petitioners are innocent, not committed any offence, falsely implicated by the defacto complainant.

There is no direct or cogent evidence to show that the petitioners instigated the deceased to commit suicide. The 1st petitioner immediately shifted the deceased to hospital which clearly indicates absence of mensrea or intention to cause death. A2 is a 49 years old house wife, has been falsely implicated due to her relation as mother-in-law, no specific overtacts attributed against

A2. Entire investigation is completed, all the material witnesses were examined, material objects were seized. Petitioners are permanent residents of Skinnerapuram village of Attili Mandal. The minor daughters of A1 are in need of care and protection. They are ready to abide any of the conditions imposed by this court for their release on bail.

3

4.Notice is given to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and memo is filed to that effect. Counter filed.

5. The brief averments of the counter are as follows:

The acts committed by the accused clearly disclose the intention to cause death of the deceased. All the Sections are clearly attracting. Only

Lws 1 to 9 were examined, so far, RFSL report is not yet received and investigation is not yet completed, if at all the petitioners released on bail, there is every likelihood of threat to the defacto complainant and they may cause harm to his life. Hence, petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP.

7. The counsel for the petitioners in his arguments submitted that the petitioners 1 and 2 were arrested on 26.04.2026 and since 43 days they are in judicial custody. According to his submissions, mere using the words is not sufficient to attract the word abatement, A2 is not at all involved and there are no allegations against A2 in the report and the petitioners are innocent.

8. Per-contra learned APP vehemently opposed to allow the prayer by contending that unable to bear the harassment of accused 1 and 2, the deceased committed suicide, investigation is still pending.

9. The point arose for determination in this petition is as follows:

Whether the petitioners/Accused 1 and 2 can be enlarged on bail

U/sec. 483 B.N.S in Cr.No.49/2026 of Attili P.S., for the offences

punishable U/secs. 85 and 108 r/w 3(5) of Bharathiya Nyaya

Sanhitha 2023 ?

4

10. P O I N T:

As could be seen from the material part of the record and case diary, the SHO of Attili P.S. registered a case in Cr.No. 49 of 2026 on 23.03.2026 against the accused 1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Sections 85, 108 r/w 3(5) of B.N.S basing on the report of the complainant, who is father of the deceased that his daughter was subjected to cruelty in the hands of the accused and unable to bear the harassment committed suicide, during the course of investigation, the accused 1 and 2 were arrested on 26.03.2026 and since then they are in judicial custody.

11. A perusal of CD further shows, Lws 1 to 9 were examined and investigation is still pending for obtaining RFSL report so also the examination of some more witnesses. Since the CD reveals material part of the investigation is completed by examining Lws 1 to 9 and part of investigation is still pending and taking into consideration of the period of remand and the 2nd accused being a woman, whose presence is required to attend the female children of A1 and deceased not opposed by APP made this court inclined to consider the prayer against the 2nd petitioner and however, the claim against the 1st petitioner is not considered since the investigation is still pending. Accordingly, point is answered partly.

12. In the result, this petition is allowed partly by enlarging 2nd petitioner/A2 on bail on execution of self bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tanuku 5 on such release, the 2nd petitioner/A2 is directed to appear before the Station

House Officer, Attili P.S., on every Monday between 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM for a period of one month or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier.

The claim against A1 is hereby dismissed.

Typed to my dictation by Typist, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 11th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Sunkara Sridevi

IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tanuku

Copy to:

1. The II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tanuku

2. The SHO, Attili P.S.

3. The counsel for 2nd petitioner/A2

In the court of the IV Additional District & Sessions Judge :: Tanuku

Present: Dr.B.Lakshmi Narayana

Special Judge for Speedy Trial of Offences under POCSO Act, 2012,

Bhimavaram FAC/IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Tanuku

Wednesday, the 13th (Thirteenth) day of May, 2026

CIS 21 of 2026

Crl.M.P.No. 98 of 2026

Crime No. 79 of 2026 of (Peravali Police Station)

Between:-

Varasala Pandu, S/o Sattiya, aged 46 years, Male, D.No.2-52, Harijanapeta, Teeparru Village of Peravali Mandal, E.G. District.

… Petitioner/Accused

And

The SHO., Peravali Police Station. Represented by its Public Prosecutor … Respondent/ Complainant

This petition is coming on 13.05.2026 for hearing before me, in the presence of Sri A.Bala Raju, Advocate for petitioner/Accused and of

Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/complainant. Upon

hearing the arguments on both sides and other material papers on record, this Court made the following:-

O R D E R

This bail application filed U/sec.483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

Sanhita, 2023 to grant regular bail to the petitioner/Accused, to release him who was arrested in connection with the case in Crime No.79/2026 of

Peravali Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 109 (1), 85 of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha Act, 2023.

2

2. The circumstances give rise to file this application are as follows:

The complainant reported that her husband/accused stopped going for coolie work, started coming home in drunken state, and began physically assaulting the complainant on suspicion of her character. He also drove her out of the house. On 13.04.2026, the complainant returned to Teeparru village. At about 8.30 PM, the accused came home in drunken state and abused her in filthy language. He left the house and again returned at about 11.00 PM in drunken condition. On 14.04.2026 at about 10.00 A, while the complainant speaking with her son over phone, the accused came to the house, abused her in filthy language and with an intention to kill her, attacked her with a knife on her right cheek, and beat with knife, causing bleeding injuries and later on, she presented a report before the Station

House Officer of Peravali Police Station which was registered a case in

Crime No.79/2026 under Section 109 (1), 85 of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha

Act, 2023 and the investigation is on.

3.The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner is resident of

Teeparru village, on 15.04.2026 police have arrested him and produced

before the learned Magistrate and since then he is in remand. The alleged

offences are not punishable with life or death imprisonment. The petitioner is no way concerned with the alleged offence and L.Ws.1 to 9 were examined and no further stage of investigation except filing charge sheet.

4.Notice is given to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and memo is filed to that effect Counter filed.

3

The brief averments of the counter are as follows:

The acts committed by the accused clearly disclose the intention to kill the defacto complainant. All the Sections are clearly attracting. Only L.Ws.1 to 9 were examined and investigation is not yet completed, if at all the petitioner released on bail, there is every likelihood of threat to the defacto complainant and he may cause harm to her life. Hence, petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP.

6. The counsel for the petitioner in his arguments submitted that the entire investigation was completed and since 15.04.2026 the petitioner is in judicial remand.

7. Per-contra learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed to allow the prayer by contending that the accused used to harass the complainant both physically and mentally with a suspicion over her, investigation is still pending.

8. The point arose for determination in this petition is as follows:

Whether the petitioner/Accused can be enlarged on bail under

Section 483 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Act, 2023 in Cr.No.79/2026

of Peravali Police Station for the offences punishable under

Sections 109 (1) and 85 of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha Act, 2023 ?

4

9. P O I N T:

The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner/accused remanded to judicial custody on 15.04.2026 for the offence under Section 109 (1) and Section 85 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Act, 2023. The learned counsel for petitioner/accused submitted that petitioner/accused was falsely implicated in this case, though no offence taken as alleged by the defacto complainant and she made false allegations out of family disputes between the accused family and complainant family. The learned counsel for petitioner/accused further submitted that petitioner/accused having permanent resident at Teeparru village and ready to submit solvencies.

10. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that investigation was not completed inspite of examining 9 witnesses, some more material witnesses has to be examined and also not yet received wound certificate.

11. On perusal the record, the defacto complainant is nothing but wife of the petitioner/accused. Moreover, as per the recitals of the report, petitioner/accused suspecting the character of the wife i.e., defacto complainant, out of that suspect on 14.04.2026 at about 10.00 AM, when defacto complainant talking on phone call out of suspect attacked on her with intention to kill her and caused injuries. We have already observed wound certificate not collected so far. Though investigating officer examined 9 witnesses the nature of the offence clearly shows petitioner/accused is having doubt on the character of the defacto complainant. At this stage, if 5 released the accused, there is every chance to attack on defacto complainant again and also shows the accused is attacking with harmful objects though know the attacking with harmful objects leads death of a victim. Hence, this court is not inclined to grant any bail at this stage.

Accordingly, point is answered

12. In the result, petition is dismissed.

Typed to my dictation by Typist by name G.V.V.Varaprasad, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 13th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Dr.B.Lakshmi Narayana

Special Judge for Speedy Trial of Offences

under POCSO Act, 2012, Bhimvaram, FAC/IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Tanuku 6 // True Copy //

I/C Superintendent. VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge's Court, Chittoor.

In the court of the IV Additional District & Sessions Judge :: Tanuku

Present: Dr.B.Lakshmi Narayana

Special Judge for Speedy Trial of Offences under POCSO Act, 2012,

Bhimavaram FAC/IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Tanuku

Wednesday, the 13th (Thirteenth) day of May, 2026

CIS 23 of 2026

Crl.M.P.No. 103 of 2026

Crime No. 156 of 2025 (Attili Police Station) Between:-

1. Kowru Durga Rao, S/o Rama Rao, aged 38 years, R/o NTR Colony, Manchili village of Attili Mandal.

2. Kowru Rama Rao, S/o Narasimha Murthy, aged 61 years, R/o NTR Colony, Manchili village of Attili Mandal.

3. Kowru Venkata Ramana, W/o Satyanarayana, aged 38 years, R/o NTR Colony, Manchili village of Attili Mandal.

… Petitioners/A1, A2 and A7

And

The SHO., Attili Police Station. Represented by its Public Prosecutor … Respondent/ Complainant

This petition is coming on 13.05.2026 for hearing before me, in the presence of Sri Y.Rajesh, Advocate for petitioners/Accused 1, 2 and 7 and of Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/complainant. Upon hearing the arguments on both sides and other material papers on record, this Court made the following:-

O R D E R

This bail application filed under Section 483 Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to grant regular bail to the petitioners/A1, A2 and

A7, to release the, who were arrested in connection with the case in Crime

No.156/2025 of Attili Police Station for the offences punishable under

Sections 115 (2), 109 (1), 351 (2) r/w 3(5) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha

Act, 2023.

2

2. The circumstances give rise to file this application are as follows:

The complainant reported that on 21.12.2025 at about 8.30 AM when he was cleaning his auto, then, A1/Kowru Durga Rao, A2/Kowru Ramaiah

A3/Kowru Sai, A4/Kowru Rama Rao, A5/Kowru Satyanarayana, A6/Kowru

Ramaiah first daughter-in-law and A7/Kowru Ramaiah second daughter-in- law abused him in filthy language and bet with intent to kill the complainant and A1 beat the complainant below right knee with iron pipe, caused he fell down, then A2 beat the complainant on his head with stick, caused bleeding injury and threaten to kill him in dire consequences as a result, the complainant received bleeding injuries and later on, he presented a report

before the Station House Officer, Attili Police Station which was registered a

case in Crime No.156/2025 under Sections 115 (2), 109 (1), 351 (2) r/w 3(5) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha Act, 2023 and the investigation is on.

3.The case of the petitioners in brief is that the petitioners are resident of Manchili village, on 07.05.2026 police have arrested them and produced

before the learned Magistrate and since then they are in remand. The

alleged offences are not punishable with life or death imprisonment. The petitioner is no way concerned with the alleged offence and L.Ws.1 to 10 were examined and except receipt of report from Regional Forensic Science

Laboratory, Vijayawada, no further stage of investigation is pending.

4.Notice is given to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and memo is filed to that effect.

3

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional

Public Prosecutor.

6. The counsel for the petitioners in his arguments submitted that except receipt of report from Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Vijayawada, remaining investigation in this case was completed. Furthermore, since 07.05.2026 the petitioners are in judicial remand.

7. Per-contra learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed to allow the prayer by contending that the accused with an intention to kill the defacto complainant, attacked him with iron rod and sticks, investigation is still pending.

8. The point arose for determination in this petition is as follows:

Whether the petitioners/A.1, A.2 and A.7 can be enlarged on bail

U/sec. 483 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Act, 2023 in Crime

No.156/2025 of Attili Police Station for the offences punishable

under Sections 115 (2), 109 (1), 351 (2) r/w 3(5) of Bharathiya

Nyaya Sanhitha Act, 2023 ?

9. P O I N T:

On considered the submission of learned counsel for petitioners that this crime i.e., Crime No.156 of 2025 and Crime No.157 of 2025 are case and counter, whereas, Accused No.1 in Crime No.157/2025 who was arrested on 09.03.2026 produced before the learned Magistrate, released the Accused No.1 by directing to furnish sureties. On considered the observation of the learned Magistrate in Crime No.157 of 2025 as well from the recitals of report of the defacto complainant which clearly shows ill- 4 feelings and disputes between these two parties. Moreover, these petitioners/A.1, A.2 and A.7 are in judicial custody from 07.05.2026. If they will behind the bars prolonged period that may leads further disputes between the parties under these two crimes. So that, this court is inclined to enlarge the bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, point is answered.

10. In the result this petition is allowed by enlarging petitioners/A.1, A.2 and A.7 on bail on execution of self bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Tanuku. On such release, the petitioners/A.1, A.2 and A.7 are directed to appear before the Station House Officer, Attili Police Station on every

Monday between 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM for a period of Two months or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier.

Typed to my dictation by Typist by name G.V.V.Varaprasad, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 13th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Dr.B.Lakshmi Narayana

Special Judge for Speedy Trial of Offences

under POCSO Act, 2012, Bhimavaram, FAC/IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Tanuku Copy to:

1. The II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tanuku

2. The Counsel for petitioners/A.1, A.2 and A.7.

3. The Station House Officer, Attili Police Station.

5 // True Copy //

I/C Superintendent. VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge's Court, Chittoor.

In the court of the IV Additional District & Sessions Judge :: Tanuku

Present: Dr.B.Lakshmi Narayana

Special Judge for Speedy Trial of Offences under POCSO Act, 2012,

Bhimavaram FAC/IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Tanuku

Wednesday, the 13th (Thirteenth) day of May, 2026

CIS 22 of 2026

Crl.M.P.No. 99 of 2026

Crime No. 79 of 2026 (Tanuku Town Police Station)

Between:-

Karagani Govind, S/o Rama Rao, aged 33 years, D.No.22-12-28, Mutyalavari Street, near SCIM degree college, 27th ward, Tanuku

… Petitioner/A1

And

The SHO., Tanuku Town Police Station. Represented by its Public Prosecutor … Respondent/ Complainant

This petition is coming on 13.05.2026 for hearing before me, in the presence of Sri A.V.V.Ramesh Kumar, Advocate for petitioner/Accused and of Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/complainant. Upon hearing the arguments on both sides and other material papers on record, this Court made the following:-

O R D E R

This bail application filed U/sec.483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

Sanhita, 2023 to grant regular bail to the petitioner/Accused, to release him who was arrested in connection with the case in Crime No.79/2026 of

Tanuku Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 109 (1) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha Act, 2023.

2

2. The circumstances give rise to file this application are as follows:

The complainant reported that due to disputes with her husband she mutually agreed to live separately and that she took a house on rent at

Pydiparru and has been living there along with her son Mahesh. On 14.03.2026 at about 1.20 PM, while she was going home for lunch, her husband Karagani Govind came to her and told her that his leg was not well and requested her to drop him near his house and then go home for lunch.

Believing him, she allowed him to sit on the back of her Access Motorcycle and started to go. When they reached Gowtham Model School at

Sajjapuram, her husband asked her to stop vehicle and said that he would leave from there. When she stopped the motorcycle, he suddenly questioned her as to why she was living separately without staying with him.

With an intention to Kill her, he took out a shaving blade that he had brought with him and attacked her on her neck. When she tried to escape from there, he chased her and again attacked her on the neck with the blade four to five times. Due to such attack, she sustained bleeding injuries and fell down on the ground and later on, she presented a report before the Station House

Officer, Tanuku Town Police Station which was registered a case in Crime

No.79/2026 under Sections 85, 109 (1) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha Act, 2023 and the investigation is on.

3.The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner is resident of

Tanuku village, on 16.03.2026 police have arrested him and produced

before the learned Magistrate and since then he is in remand. The alleged

3 offences are not punishable with life or death imprisonment. The petitioner is no way concerned with the alleged offence and L.Ws.1 to 7 were examined and no further stage of investigation is pending, except filing of charge sheet.

4.Notice is given to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and memo is filed to that effect. Counter filed.

The brief averments of the counter are as follows:

The acts committed by the accused clearly disclose the intention to kill the complainant. All the Sections are clearly attracting. Only L.Ws.1 to 12 were examined and investigation is not yet completed, if at all the petitioner released on bail, there is every likelihood of threat to the defacto complainant and he may cause harm to her life. Hence, petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional

Public Prosecutor.

6. The counsel for the petitioner in his arguments submitted that the material investigation was completed and since 16.03.2026 the petitioner is in judicial remand.

7. Per-contra learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed to allow the prayer by contending that the accused with an intention to kill her as she was living separately without staying with him, attacked her on her neck with a shaving blade, investigation is still pending.

4

8. The point arose for determination in this petition is as follows:

Whether the petitioner/Accused can be enlarged on bail under

Section 483 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Act, 2023 in Cr.No.79/2026

of Tanuku Town Police Station for the offences punishable

under Sections 85, 109 (1) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha Act,

2023 ?

9. P O I N T:

On perused the case file, it clearly shows investigation completed and filed the charge sheet. Hence, this court inclined to allow the petition by enlarged the bail as prayed. Accordingly, point is answered.

10. In the result, this petition is allowed by enlarging petitioner/A1 on bail on execution of self bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tanuku.

Typed to my dictation by Typist by name G.V.V.Varaprasad, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 13th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Dr.B.Lakshmi Narayana

Special Judge for Speedy Trial of Offences

under POCSO Act, 2012, Bhimvaram, FAC/IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Tanuku Copy to:

1. The II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tanuku.

2. The Counsel for petitioner/A.1.

3. The Station House Officer, Tanuku Town Police Station.

5 // True Copy //

I/C Superintendent. VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge's Court, Chittoor.