Piili Rama Rap vs The State of Andhra Pradesh Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR — CRLP/4608/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED AS NON PROSECUTION on 05th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: APHC010286802026

e-Filing Number

26-05-2026

Filing Number

CRLP/5738/2026

Filing Date

26-May-2026

Registration No

CRLP/4608/2026

Registration Date

26-May-2026

Judge

A. Hari Haranadha Sarma

Coram

A. Hari Haranadha Sarma

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRLP ( 41 )

Sub-Category

U/s.438 Cr.p.c Anticipatory Bail ( 61 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL Section

Decision Date

05-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED AS NON PROSECUTION

Last updated 06-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Piili Rama Rap

    Adv. Y V ANIL KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Andhra Pradesh Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-Jun-2026

    A. Hari Haranadha SarmaView PDF

    Case Summary: CRLP 4608/2026 Piili Rama Rap sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 66/2026 registered at Agiripalli PS, Eluru District. At the hearing, the petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh petition later. The High Court granted permission and dismissed the criminal petition as not pressed, allowing the petitioner to file a fresh petition at an appropriate time. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Jun-2026

    Interlocutory ( Anticipatory Bails)

    A. Hari Haranadha Sarma

  4. 04-Jun-2026

    Interlocutory ( Anticipatory Bails)

    Balaji Medamalli

  5. 28-May-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 26-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRLP/4608/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRLP 4608/2026 Piili Rama Rap sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 66/2026 registered at Agiripalli PS, Eluru District. At the hearing, the petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh petition later. The High Court granted permission and dismissed the criminal petition as not pressed, allowing the petitioner to file a fresh petition at an appropriate time. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case