The High Court · 2025

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri Naresh sunkara, Advocate for the petitioner and the pubric prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENTVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 3O53 of 2o25 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is hied under Section 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS,) by the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.1, seeking bail in Crime No.76 of 2025 of Moinabad Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2),333, 115(2), 352, 35i(3), 308(5), 109 read with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ,BNSJ.

2. Heard Sri Sunkara Narcsh, learned counsel for the petitione r and Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, Learned Additional public prosecutor appearing for respondenr-S [ate.

3. The case of prosecution in brief is that on OB.O2.2O2S at 10:30 hours Lhe de-facto complainant Sri CS Rangarajan, priest of Chilkoor Balaji Temple, Iodged a complaint stating that on O7.O2.2O25 at O8:OO hours around 2O people (ladies and gents) forcefully entered into his private quarters situated at the back side of Sri Balaji Temple, Chilkur, started arguing with him and hit him strongly on his face and body. He further stated that the pcrson, who led the group claiming to be the reincarnation of 2 Mukkanti (lord shiva) has said his name is Veera Rallhava Reddy started hitting him on his face and his follor.r,ers thrce to four in number were joined him. They recorded the ,,vho1e thirrg in the cell phone cameras. He also stated that they threatened him with dire consequences, il he did not listen to them, they rnould pick up him and the result u,ill be dangerous. They also asked hi-n to recruit people for his Sainyam and support his causes mone tarily and all the time whcn complainant rvanted to talk, thct, s1- r,"O n ,, ,r* him and said that Jzou cannot talk, you have to listen. He further stated that his sishyas disciples did a little bit of fa:t chcck on him. They iou r-rd in many videos on social mcdia tha I he claimed that he can go to any extent and evcn take pcople livr:s if rcquired. it is further stated that if such persons are allou'ecl to create a parallel army like Na-xals in Lhe name of Rama Scn a it n ill be darrgerous.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submittr: I that the petitioner is innocent and he did not commit the allt:ged offence and he was falsely implicated in the above said crime . He further submitted that the Investigating Oflicer u,ithouL b[lowing the mandatory procedure prescribed under Sections 5O A ar-rd 57 of Cr.P.C., arrested the petitioner i,vithout giving intime..tion to his lamily members and the ingredients of Section 3Og(5) and 35 1(3) of J BNS are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. However, with an intention to harass the petitioner, the Investigating Officer added the above Sections against the petitioner. There are no specific allegations to attract the provisions of Section 308(5) of BNS.

5. He further submitted that the pctitioner was arrested on O9.O2.2O25 and since then he is in judicial custody. He also submitted that entire investigation is completed and the petitioner is ready to cooperatc with the investigalion and also abide by the conditions, ',,r,hich are going [o be imposed against the petitioner.

6. Learned Additionat public prosecutor opposed the bail peLition and submitled that the petitioner has committed grave offences and there are specific allegations against the petitioner to attract the provisions of Secrions 3OB(5) and 35 1(3) of BNS.

7. He further submittcd that as per the statements of the witnesses, the petitioner assembled unlawfully with intend to provoke breach of peace and the petitioner and other accused persons trespassed into thc house of the complainant and assaulted him by claiming that Lhe petitioner is incarnation of Mukkanti (lord shiva), and thrcatenecl him with dire consequences that the complainant has to support Veeraraghava Reddy ideologies of Ramqlajya Sthapana Marg and demanded him to ,1 provide monev and persons to maintain it and puncherl on his face and gave blow.s over his body.

8. He also submitted that that accused Nos.23 to 26 are still absconding and the investigation is under progrcss. If the petitioner is eniarged on bai1, he will create law and or<ier problem and there is every chance to threatcn the complainant and o[her u,itnesscs r,l,it,h dire conseouences and to intcrfcrt: r,iih thc invcstigation.

9. Having considered the rival submissions maclc bv the rcspeclive partres and after pcrusal o[ the mate rial r r:rilable on record, it reveals that the complainant is thc priest c f Sri Balaji Tcinpic, Chilkoor Viilage and he is staying in pri\.ite quarters sitLratcd at back sicle of temple. The Sub lr-rspcc{o - ol [,ohcc, N4oinabad filcd counter aihdavit, wher-ern it is speciti,::rllv statcd that on 07.O2.2025 the petitioner along u.'ith ot[i:r- accused I respassed entered into the house of Llne de-facto r:omplainant, s'hich is situated at the backside of the tcmple and rsr;.rultcd him b1' claiming that he is incarnation of Mr_tkkanti (lorcl shiva), and threalened tl-rc complainant r.l,ith dire consequences th irt hc has to support Vee raraghava Reddy ideologies of Ramara.;-,:, Sthapar-ra Mtirg and also dcmanded him to provide monev ancl pcrsolts Lo ) complainant and gave blows over his body. There are specific allegations against the petitioner.

10. The record further reveals that accused Nos. 1 to 20 threatened the complainant by saying [hat ..we are giving you time , I until Ugadi festival. By then, you must send one person from each village to support us in serting up t['re Rama Dandu. If it does not happen, we will kill you" and forced him to deliver monev lor his cause_

11. According to the counter affidavrt, the accused Nos.23 to 26 were absconding and the petitioner is an accuscd in other crimes i.e., Crime No.73 of 20L6 of Banjarn Hilts t,olicc Sration registered against the petitioner for the offenccs punishab[c under Sections 341, 353, 448 read with Section 5l l, 1ll8 read n,irh Scction 34 of IPC and Crime No.6O of 2025 o[ Anaparthy police Station, East Godavari District, Andhra Praclesh State registcred against the petitioner for the offence under Sections 152, 352, 197(l) oi BNS.

12. Taking into consideration the above lacts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, at this stage, especiall_y when Lhe investigation is under progress.

13. Accordingly, this Criminat Pcrition is dismissed 6 As a seque I thereto, miscellaneous applicatic ns, il anv, pending in tl-ris pctition stald closcd. //TRUE COPY// SD/- T.IlRUMALA DEVI DEPUTY REGISTRAR ser:#h+orrrcen The ll Additional Juniour civil Judge-cum-Xlll Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Raiendernagar, Cyberabad at Ranga Reddy. The Station House Officer, Moinabad Police Station, Cyberat'ad, fie CCs to Tlre Public Prosecutor High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad iOUTI 4 One CC to Sri Naresh Sunkara, Advocate [OPUCI 5 Two CD Copres \ To, 1 2 3 SI{igh HIGH COURT DATED:21 10312025 ORDER CRLP.No.3053 of 2025 IAot: o .A 1 t| lul ?ili5 i I 't DISMISSlSG THR CRIMINAL PETITION btt) ll/t-'