Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Sections 482, 437, 438, 439 — Bail — Anticipatory bail — Misappropriation of postal funds by Branch Post Master — Amount misappropriated repaid — Departmental termination already effected — Criminal prosecution subsequently initiated — Whether pre-arrest bail can be granted — Held, yes.APHC010511142025
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: 10064/2025
Between:
1. BALINENI DINESH, S/O B VARADA RAJULU AGED ABOUT 23
YEARS, R/O 6-580, NAGULA GUNTA,SRIKALAKASTI, TIRUPATI
DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep. by its Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Nelapadu, Amaravati, Guntur District.
Through the Sub Inspector, Narayanavanam Police Station, Tirupati
District
...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 Court may be pleased to direct the
Petitioner/Accused to be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in
connection with Crime No.58 of 2025, dated 22.7.2025 on the file of
Narayanavanam Police Station, Tirupati District, under Sections 316(5),
318(4), 344 of BNS in the interests of justice.
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1.N BHARATH SIMHA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
2025:APHC:41102
2
GTK, J
Crl.P.No.10064 of 2025
Dated 03.10.2025
ORDER:
The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 482 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to
enlarge the petitioner/accused in the event of his arrest in connection with
Crime No.58 of 2025 of Narayanavanam Police Station, Tirupati District, for
the offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 344 of B.N.S.
2. Case of the prosecution is that the complainant is working as a Postal
Inspector in Puttur Sub-Division and on 07.09.2024, he received a complaint
from one Ananda Rao who is working as Post Master in Narayanavanam that
the accused who is Branch Post Master of Aranyam Kandriga was absent
from duty by retaining excess cash. On 09.09.2024, the complainant
inspected the branch office and found that against a closing balance of
Rs.98,144/-, only Rs.460/- was available. A panchanama was conducted in
the presence of witnesses and he admitted in writing that he used the amount
of Rs.97,684/- for his personal expenses. He subsequently paid the amount
and he was removed from service on 02.05.2025.
3. Sri N. Bharat Simha Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that the amount misappropriated by the petitioner was
admittedly paid back to the department and the same was accepted. Despite
the same, criminal action is sought to be taken against the petitioner by the de
2025:APHC:41102
3
GTK, J
Crl.P.No.10064 of 2025
Dated 03.10.2025
facto complainant by raising complaint on 11.09.2025. Hence, the petitioner
prays to enlarge him on pre-arrest bail.
4. Per contra, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, submits that
departmental proceedings and criminal proceedings are entirely different and
they are at liberty to prosecute upon the complaint lodged by the defacto
complainant.
5. Perused the record.
6. Though there is force in the statement made by the learned Assistant
Public Prosecutor that both departmental proceedings and criminal
proceedings are different and stand on different footing, the petitioner has
already paid the amount to the department and he was terminated from
service by the department. Upon the complaint lodged by the defacto
complainant, the petitioner/accused is apprehending arrest.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the
petitioner would cooperate with the investigation if so conducted/initiated
against the petitioner and that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Nagula
Gunta, Srikalahasti, Tirupati District. Since balance of convenience is in favour
of the petitioner, this Court feels it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on
anticipatory bail.
2025:APHC:41102
4
GTK, J
Crl.P.No.10064 of 2025
Dated 03.10.2025
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following
conditions:
i. In the event of arrest of the petitioner, he shall be enlarged
on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties for
the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting police
officials;
ii. The petitioner shall make himself available for
investigation as and when required;
iii. The petitioner shall not cause any threat, inducement or
promise to the prosecution witnesses;
iv. The State is at liberty to take appropriate action as
contemplated in the event the petitioner/accused does not
cooperate with the enquiry/investigation.
______________________
TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA, J
Date: 03.10.2025
ARB
2025:APHC:41102
5
GTK, J
Crl.P.No.10064 of 2025
Dated 03.10.2025
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.10064 of 2025
Date: 03.10.2025
ARB
2025:APHC:41102
