AMARAVATI, India, Feb. 17 -- Andhra Pradesh High Court issued the following order on Jan. 16:

1. The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity 'the BNSS'), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.174 of 2025 of Bhimavaram Rural Police Station, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused herein for the offence punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity 'the BNS').

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence. He was falsely implicated in this case. He is a dental doctor having finished his post graduation. He has been in judicial custody in the past 58 days. The ingredients of abatement to commit suicide are not attracting to the case and urged to enlarge the petitioner on bail. He is willing to abide by any condition which this Court deems fit while enlarging the petitioner on bail.

4. Per contra, Ms.P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and Sri S.Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.2 vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that investigation is at progressive stage. The petitioner has made a false promise to marry the victim (deceased) and the victim was unable to bare the deception played by the petitioner, she resorted to extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. The petitioner/accused caused so much of distress to the victim who is a dental medico and urged to dismiss the petition as the investigation is at progressive stage.

5. As seen from the record especially the FIR, there are no allegations of sexual abuse by the petitioner against the victim. The petitioner is a Dentist, did his MDS. As per the allegation of the De-facto complainant, the father of the deceased, the victim having completed her 4th year BDS, she was doing as house-surgeon. The victim and petitioner loved each other for about 2 years. The victim revealed to De-facto complainant that she had love affair with the petitioner for the past 2 years; the petitioner and the victim decided to marry; when the parents of the victim asked the victim whether they would negotiate with the petitioner or his parents for their marriage, the victim replied that she would deal with the issue; when the victim requested the petitioner to marry, the petitioner informed her that his parents were looking alliance for him and he was not interested in marrying the victim; if their marriage is arranged, the petitioner would die. Later on 11.11.2025, at 8.30 PM when the victim called the petitioner, he replied that his engagement is going to be held on coming Monday; he advised the victim to marry another person and further replied that the victim should not call him again, and she should forget him.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816xyoLUu0whs4eJIrKy9ZdyxgihyNtJpqXmENA%2F81UPOHG&caseno=CRLP/12996/2025&cCode=1&cino=APHC010681182025&state_code=2&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.