The High Court · 2025

Sri, Sai Reddy Mahender Reddy @ Thota Mahendar Reddy, S/o Late Narsimha Reddy, Aged about 55 years, Occ- Business, R/o. H. No. 24-101 , Jyothi Nagar Colony, Old Alwal, Alwal Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana-500 010. AND ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.1 The State of Telangana, Through SHO, Police Station Alwal, Cyberabad, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 482 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 Station House Officer, Alwal Police Station, Medchal- Malkajgiri District, Cyberabad Commissionerate, to release the Petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail in the event of her arrest in connection with Crime No. 326 of 2025, dated- 2910312025, registered under Sections 105, 318(4) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, by the Alwal Police Station, Medchal-MAlkajgiri District, Cyberabad Commissionerate, for the alleged offences under the aforementioned provisions. The Petitioner further prays that bail be granted This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K. Karunakar,- Advocate for the Petitioner and Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent The Coud made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6549 OF 2025 ORDER: This CrirnirLzLl Petition is filed under Sectron / 8i, of the Bharatiya Nzrg,rrii< Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for s[-r'rrt 'BNSS') seeking anticipirtc ry bail to the pe titioner/ accu sed No. I Ln Crime No.326 of 2025 orL thc file of the Station House Ofhcer, ltlv al Police Shtion, Cyberr.Lba tl, registered for the offence punish:b[e under Secrions 105, 318(1) read with Section 3(5) of the BhariLtil''a Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (fcr short 'BNS).

2. The cast: of ,lLc prosecution is that on 29.03.2025. dt de .facto complainant lorlged a complaint against the petitione r/ trc cu sed No.1 and others alle:gi.-rg that petitioner/ accused No.1 pur(,1.)sed rice r.r,orth Rs.2,60,(,)0(r,'- lrom de-facto complainant's elder lrro[her and issued a chcqLre .or the said amount. When t he c he,true was presented ir-r the k,ttnk for encashment, the same was re t ur necl with an endorsemcnt ':nsufficient funds". Subsequently, lte de-facto complainant trlonr3 u,ith his brother went to the resirlcn<:e of the petitioner/ accuse([ No. i to seek clarihcation abotrt th,' r )ayment. During the cout-se ,rf conversation, the petitioner, akrtrg u itt: his wife and son (accusr-'cl \os.2 and 3 respectively), allegedly;rbrr:.ccl them. It is further allegcd tl-iat petitioner/ accused No.1 pushed t]ne de-.facto complainanl's ,:1c1,r:- brother, resulting which he fe 11 dcu n and lose 2 NNR,J Crlp 65a9 2025 his consciousness. The injured was taken to the Hospital, where the Doctors declared his condition as critical. Hence, the complaint.

3. Heard Sri K.Karunakar, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No. 1 and learned Additional pubric prosecutor for the respondent-State. perused the record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not involved in the said offence and he has been falsely implicated in the crime, which is purely civ nature. The a egation is that petitioner/accused No.1 purchased rice worth Rs.2,@,00O/_ and issued a post-dated cheque in discharge of the said liability is incorrect. Although it is alleged that the cheque was dishonored due to insuffrcient funds, the proper and efficacious remedy is available to the de-facto complainant to issue notice to the petitioner/ accused No.1 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Insrruments Act, lgg1. However, instead of initiating proceedings as per the statutory provisions, the de-facto complainant along with his brother unlawfully trespassed into the residential premises of the petitioner/accused No. 1. It is further submitted that the d-e-facto compiainant is a chronic patient of hypertension ancl he had been under medical care and he was hospitalized just a month before the alleged incident. Therefore, any claim of collapse or unconsciousness on the said date appears to be a consequence ol.his -__-=__= 3 NNR,J Cr lp 6549 2O25 pre-existing med (rai condition and cannot be attribl te:l to any Furtht-'r, tL er': are no assault by the l) )tl tioner/ accused No' l specific ouetl acl:; attributed against accused Nos 2 and 3' pe titioner/ accu se d No.1 has no intention ot mens r€a 10 c(lmmit the offence and he liis permanent abode in Hyderabad 'lherefore' learned courtsel prays this Court to grant anticipatoll' bail to the petirioncr/a(,' lsL( No.l.

5.LcarncclAdcitionalPublicProsecutor,oninstructions',submits cc rsecl No' 1 that there art: scriotts allegations against the petitio ner/' and hc filed (]r1'IriI,P'No.187 of 2025 in Crime No.3:](1 cf |2Cr25 tln the file ol II Acld i,iorr;rl District and session Judge-ctrm I Metropolitan Sessions Jurllie, Medchal-Malkajgiri and the sarte v'z s dismissed uide order, rlr'Ltc l 02.05.2025 as the investigatior q': s yet to be ' completcci. Flcncc, prave d to dismiss the Criminal Petilion'

6. Havins co rsidered the rival submissions macte L)y iearned counse I for t ,:s1x'ctivc parties and after perusai of thr: material availablc on rcc()Id. it is revealed that there are sericus riliegalions levelled against pt:titioner/ accused No.1 and the investi'1a: ion is still in progress. L.r Lrr:se circumstances, this Court is of t-he '::onsidered opinion that it s; not a fit case to grant anticipatoq' l:ail to the petitioner/acc us::1 No. 1 at this stage, especially 'r'hen the investigation is t nder progrg,Es, there is every chan,-t t,l interfere 4 NNR.J CrIp 6549 2O25 with the investigation and influence the witnesses. Further. the petitioner/ accused No.1 has not pleaded an),where that he is apprehending arrest in the hands of police Therefore, taking into consideration the gravity of the offence and the stage of the investigation, this Court is not inciined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/ accused No. 1. 7 Accordingly, the Criminal petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, sh.,all stand closed. Sd/- P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER To, Medchal District. at Hyderabad[OUT] l The ll Additionar District and r Mekoporitan Sessions Judge at Medchar. 2 !!".X.Additionat Metropotitan Magisirate at Medchat Court, Cyberabad, 3 Two ccs to the pubric prosecutor, State of rerangana, High court Buirdings 4 The station House officer, Arwar porice station, Medchar Markajgiri District, 5. One CC to Sri K. Karunakar, Advocate IOPUCI 6. Two CD Copies Plp/gh Cyberabad Commissionerate. w VACATION COURT ./ (" / i, -{ til, , ' ''::1=:r i- Jiir ? t t\[\ v C) ]', HIGH COURT DATED:2110512A25 ORDER CRLP.No.6549 of 2025 DISMISSING TF]IE CRL.P. I o8@ W*