LawforAll

advocatemmmohan

My photo
since 1985 practicing as advocate in both civil & criminal laws

WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD

WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - SHARE THE KNOWLEDGE

Monday, October 6, 2025

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482 — Pre-arrest bail — Grant of — Confessional statement of co-accused — Evidentiary value — Held, confession of co-accused cannot be made the sole basis to implicate another accused. Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 2023 — Sections 7 r/w 8-B(2) — Illegal transportation of liquor — Allegation that Accused No.1 purchased contraband liquor from petitioner/Accused No.2 — Petitioner arrayed as accused solely on the basis of confession of co-accused — No independent material found — Held, confessional statement cannot be relied upon to bring another person into array of accused — Pre-arrest bail justified. Facts: On 24.12.2025, during a vehicle check near Bairupalli Cross, V. Kota Mandal, the police apprehended Accused No.1 transporting 192 tetra packets (17.280 litres) of Johns Original Choice Deluxe Whisky on a motorcycle. The liquor was allegedly purchased from the petitioner/Accused No.2, J. Vasantha Reddy, for illegal sale. Based solely on the confession of Accused No.1, the petitioner was arrayed as Accused No.2 in Crime No.287/2024 of V. Kota Urban Police Station. Held: The Court observed that as per the settled legal position, a confessional statement of one accused cannot form the sole basis to implicate another. Reference was made to the Supreme Court decision in State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu, (2005) 11 SCC 600. Considering the absence of independent material against the petitioner and the settled principle of law, the Court found it a fit case for granting pre-arrest bail.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482 — Pre-arrest bail — Grant of — Confessional statement of co-accused — Evidentiary value — Held, confession of co-accused cannot be made the sole basis to implicate another accused.


Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 2023 — Sections 7 r/w 8-B(2) — Illegal transportation of liquor — Allegation that Accused No.1 purchased contraband liquor from petitioner/Accused No.2 — Petitioner arrayed as accused solely on the basis of confession of co-accused — No independent material found — Held, confessional statement cannot be relied upon to bring another person into array of accused — Pre-arrest bail justified.


Facts:

On 24.12.2025, during a vehicle check near Bairupalli Cross, V. Kota Mandal, the police apprehended Accused No.1 transporting 192 tetra packets (17.280 litres) of Johns Original Choice Deluxe Whisky on a motorcycle. The liquor was allegedly purchased from the petitioner/Accused No.2, J. Vasantha Reddy, for illegal sale. Based solely on the confession of Accused No.1, the petitioner was arrayed as Accused No.2 in Crime No.287/2024 of V. Kota Urban Police Station.


Held:

The Court observed that as per the settled legal position, a confessional statement of one accused cannot form the sole basis to implicate another. Reference was made to the Supreme Court decision in State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu, (2005) 11 SCC 600. Considering the absence of independent material against the petitioner and the settled principle of law, the Court found it a fit case for granting pre-arrest bail.


APHC010506072025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3548]

FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF OCTOBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:9945 of 2025

Between:

J Vasantha Reddy Alias Vasanth Reddy ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1.SATHEESH KUMAR EERLA

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Court made the following:

2025:APHC:41222

ORDER:

Heard,

Sri Satheesh Kumar Eerla, learned counsel for the

petitioner/accused No.2 and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for

the Respondent-State.

1. 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.287 of

2024 of V. Kota Urban Police Station, Chittoor District, registered for the

alleged offences punishable under Sections 7 read with 8-B-2 APPA,

2023.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 24.12.2025 at about 08.00

A.M., Near Bairupalli Cross, on V. Kota-Pernumbut Road, V. Kota

Mandal, Accused No.1/M.Reddeppa, was caught during a vehicle check

transporting 192 Tetra Packets of 90 ML Johns Original Choice Deluxe

Whisky (17.280 liters, worth Rs.7,680/-) on a motorcycle (Reg.No.KA 03

HH 0677). The Liquor was allegedly purchased from the

petitioner/accused No.2 by name J. Vasantha Reddy, for illegal sale.

The Police arrested the accused No.1 and the contraband along with

motorcycle were seized under a Maharzanama, with one tetra packet

2025:APHC:41222

sealed for chemical analysis. The petitioner/accused No.2 is found

absconding and based on the mediators’ report, the Police registered

the above crime against the accused. Hence the FIR.

3. The entire arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the

petitioner/accused No.2 based on confession statement of accused

No.1, the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2 and as per the settled

principles of law, the confessional statements cannot be taken into

account. The aforesaid proposition is well settled in the Judgment of the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in State (NCT of Delhi) vs. Navjot Sandhu1

,

wherein it has categorically observed that the confessional statements

cannot be a basis to bring the other accused or witnesses on record.

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor had

advanced his arguments opposing the petition and stated that the

petitioner/accused No.2 shall not be released on bail much less

anticipatory and further argued that whole case is based on the

petitioner/accused No.2 himself.

5. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court finds that

the balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioner/accused No.2

and also keeping in view the said law the confessional statement cannot

be the basis to bring the other accused or witnesses into frame. Hence,


1

2005 11 SCC 600

2025:APHC:41222

this Court deems it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/accused

No.2.

6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following

conditions:

I. In the event of his arrest, the petitioner/Accused No.2

shall be enlarged on bail subject to his 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 arresting police officials;

II. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall make himself available

for investigation as and when required;

III. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not cause any threat,

inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses;

IV. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall appear before the

Station House Officer concerned once in a week i.e., on

every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., till

filing of the charge sheet.

V. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not leave the limits of

the District without the express permission from the

Station House Officer concerned.

2025:APHC:41222

VI. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall surrender his passport,

if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does

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

effect to the Investigating Officer.

VII. The petitioner/accused No.2 shall co-operate with the

investigation and also attend as and when required by the

investigation agency-State. Any deviation or contravention

in this regard, the Respondent/State is at liberty to arrest

the petitioner/accused No.2.

_______________________

 TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA,J

Date: 03.10.2025

SRT/KNN

2025:APHC:41222

16

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:9945 of 2025

03.10.2025

SRT/KNN

2025:APHC:41222