― Advertisement ―

HomeShaik Hussain Alias Mohammad Hussain vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on...

Shaik Hussain Alias Mohammad Hussain vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 9 March, 2026

Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati

Shaik Hussain Alias Mohammad Hussain vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 9 March, 2026

                                      1

 APHC010110212026
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                  AT AMARAVATI                        [3396]
                           (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                    MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF MARCH
                     TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

                                 PRESENT

  THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

                     CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1681/2026

Between:

   1. SHAIK HUSSAIN ALIAS MOHAMMAD HUSSAIN,, S/O ALLAVUDDIN
      AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS R/O THURAKAPALEM
      VILLAGE, MACHAVARAM MANDAL PLANADU DISTRICT.

                                                 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

                                    AND

   1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor
      High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

                                          ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

     Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS
praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of
Criminal Petition, the High Courtpleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused
No. 1 by granting regular bail in Crime No. 01/2026 on the file of Machavaram
Police Station, Palnadu District

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

   1. RAMALAKSHMANA REDDY SANEPALLI

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

   1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                                         2


     THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

                    CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1681/2026

ORDER:

The Criminal Petition under Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2024 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the

Petitioner/Accused No.1, seeking regular bail in Cr.No.01 of 2026 on the file

of Machavaram Police Station, Palnadu District, registered for the alleged

offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 118(1), 351 (2) BNS and

Section 75 J.J.A-2015 .

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on eport on 02.01.2026 at

01.00 PM through hospital Intimation by complainant Shaik Mabuvali Sio

Karampudi Bude, 30 yrs, C/Muslim, Turakapalem village, Machavaram

Mandal stated that he work as a daily wage labourer and have one son,

Shaik Khalid, aged 10 years, and one daughter, Shaik Pouja. On 01-01-

2026 at about 3:30 PM, while my son Khalid, my second elder brother’s son

Nazeer, and our relative¿s son Nizamuddin were playing on the road in front

of our house, our neighbour the accused Shaik Hussain Sio Allavuddin,

came there in a drunken state, abused the children with filthy language, and

assaulted them with a belt. My son Khalid sustained swelling injury below

the left knee, Nizamuddin suffered a skin injury near the left foot, and

Nazeer was injured near the right elbow. When my son fell down, Shaik

Hussain, with intention to kill, pressed my sons testicles forcefully with both
3

hands, causing him severe pain and loud cries. On hearing this, neighbours

Shaik Mabu Subhani and Shaik Allavuddin came there, upon which Shaik

Hussain fled from the spot. The injured children were later taken to Gurazala

Government Hospital for treatment.

3. Heard Sri Rama Lakashmana Reddy, learned counsel for the

Petitioner and Mrs. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public

Prosecutor, representing the State/Respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that there are no

ingredients attract the alleged offence under Section 109 (1) of BNS in this

case and at the instance of political involvement the alleged Section under

Section 109 (1) of BNS mentioned. The other offence are bailable in nature.

Investigation is completed. L.W1 to 6 are examined, except filing of charge-

sheet. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 03.01.2026. There is

no apprehension that would be the petitioner is abscond from the court or to

tamper the prosecution witnesses if he is released on bail. The petitioner is

permanent abode of Thurakapalem village and he is ready to comply with

the conditions imposed by the Court. He would further submit that the

investigation is completed and injured persons are discharged from the

hospital on the very same day of the incident. He would further submit that

the petitioner has not involved in any other cases and finally prays to

enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on regular bail.

4

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, representing the State, submits

with regard to the progress of investigation that, out of the total witnesses,

six witnesses have been examined so far. She would further submit that the

nature of the injuries are simple in nature. Charge-sheet was not yet filed.

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass

appropriate Orders.

6. Considering the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of

the material on record, since crucial part of investigation has been

completed, the question of tampering with evidence does not arise. Further,

having regard to the period of detention already undergone by the petitioner,

this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner/accused on bail, subject to the

following conditions:

i. Petitioner/Accused shall be released on bail on his executing a

personal bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only)

with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the

learned Junior Civil Judge, Piduguralla.

ii. The petitioner/Accused shall appear before the learned Junior

Civil Judge, Piduguralla, twice in a week i.e., on Monday and

Thursday at 10:30 am, till further orders.

iii. The petitioner/Accused shall not leave the limits of the State

without prior permission from the learned Junior Civil Judge,

Piduguralla.

5

iv. The petitioner/Accused shall not commit or indulge in

commission of any offence in future.

v. The petitioner/Accused shall cooperate with the investigating

officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself

available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and

when required.

vi. The petitioner/Accused shall not, directly or indirectly, make any

inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the

facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such

facts to the court or to any police officer.

vii. The petitioner/Accused shall surrender his passport, if any, to the

learned Junior Civil Judge, Piduguralla. If he claims that he does

not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to

the learned Junior Civil Judge, Piduguralla.

7. In the event of violation of any of the above conditions, the prosecution

shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.

8. It is also made clear that the observations made in this order are only for

the purpose of deciding the bail applications and they shall not be construed

as opinion on the merits of the Crime.

6

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed.

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in

this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

__________________________________________
DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Date: 09.03.2026.

KKV



Source link