MANNAVA KIRAN Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Petition, under Sec. 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNSS'), seeking regular bail to the Petitioner/Accused in P.R.C.No.52 of 2021 in respect of Crime No.98 of 2021 of Arundalpet Police Station, Guntur Urban, registered for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 r/w.34 of IPC against the petitioner/accused and other accused.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the defacto complainant, working as Watchman at Medical College for Mens, Amaravathi road Guntur since from a year. On 10/3/2021, in the night while he is on duty, at about 1.00 A.M. four unknown persons came and tried to enter into the hostel premises, then he tried to restrain them. On that they picked up quarrel and beat the defacto complainant with stick and caused bleeding head injury and multiple injuries. One of the culprits revealed his name as Donka Satyam. On alarming of victim, the hostel students rushed and shifted him to GGH, Guntur. After getting treatment, he went to Police Station and lodged a report against the petitioner herein and other accused.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was previously granted bail by an order dtd. 16/12/2022, in Crl.M.P.No.1824 of 2022 in Crime No.98 of 2021, on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial of Offences against Women-cum-V Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur. The learned counsel further states that on 24/7/2023, the petitioner was unable to appear before the Court due to unavoidable circumstances, and no representation was made on his behalf. As a result, the learned V Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Guntur, issued a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) against the petitioner. The police executed the NBW on 7/2/2025, and since then, the petitioner has been in judicial custody. The learned counsel further notes that after the completion of the investigation, the case has been committed to the Sessions Court. Additionally, it is submitted that due to the ill-health of the petitioner's wife, he was unable to attend the Court proceedings.