The High Court · 2025

The State of Telangana,, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of for the State of Telangana at 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 grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A7 in the evenI of his arrest in Crime No.931/2025 Patancheru Police Station, Hyderabad Dt 09-10-2025 Offences U/Sec. '109 352 351(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS and order immediate release of the petitioner and pass such other order or other orders as Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justiQe. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M SALEEIv! ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. Arun Kumar Dodla the Additional Public Prosecutor (TG ) on behalf of the Sole Respondent. The Court made the following: OROER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TI;LANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SI JANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.15670 of 2I)25 DATE: L2.12.2O25 BETWEEN: D. Nikhil The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Ftblic Prosecutor, High Court at l{yderabad. And ORDER .. petition t -/accused No.7 .... Respond,: rt/ complainant This Criminal Petition is hled under Section 1 B2 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') rr grant of pre- arrest bail to the petitioner, who is arrayed as I :cused No.7 in Crime No.93 | of 2025 before the Patanchem Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishablr under Sections 109, 352, 351(2) read with 3(5) of BNS. 2 SI(II,J Crl.P.t{o,15670 of 2025

2. The brief facts of the case are that the de facto complainant lodged a complaint on 09.10.2025 stating that she and several other women had invested gold and cash amounting to about Rs. 18 crores u,ith one Smt. Vidya, who had allegedly collected the amounts in the name of investment and later faiied to return them. When the complainant and other investors visited Vidya's residence at APR Grandio, Patancheru upon her request, Vidya allegedly abused them and, along with her husband, relatives, and associates, physically assaulted the investors with rods and sticks. One investor, Kalamma, rvas allegedly beaten severely and threatened with death, after which she was shifted to the hospital.

3. Heard Sri M. Saleem, learned counsel appearing on behalf o[ the petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the FIR was a misuse of legal process and that the petitioner was falsely implicated to exert pressure in a monetary dispute between the complainant and Smt. Vidya and that the petitioner had no role in the alleged incident, was not present at the scene, and was dragged into the case solely to blackmail and harass him. He further submitted that the petitioner was a private employee with a w .// a \ 3 SKIi,J I l.P.No.15670 of2025 permanent residence, dependent family menr )crs, and no likelihood of absconding or interfering with tl r investigation. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant pre ar:..st bail to the petitioner by allowing rhis Criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional [)rr r]ic prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned t cunsel for the petitioner stating that the allegations leveled agair l t the petitioner are serious in nature_ Further, the investigar it r r.r.as not yet completed and that the grievous injuries were sus _. ined by the de facto complainant and filed medical report to tha r effect. At this stage, granting of pre arrest ba to the petition.r ioes not arise. Therefore, he prayed the court to dismiss the crinrir al petition.

6. In light of the submissions made by both the :arned counsel and upon a perusal of the material available on rr r ord, it appears that the main allegation against thc petitioner i:, that he, along with the other accused, allegedly participated in th r assault on the investors who visited the residence of Smt. V;c ya demanding return of their invested amounts. The record furth: . discloses that one of the victims, namely Kalamma, is stated to lave sustained grievous injuries, and the medical rcport filed bv lee prosecution prima facie corroborates the same. Further, the nvestigation is t I 4 SKS,J Crl.P.No.l5670 of2O25 (' still in progress, and the role of each accused, including the petitioner, is yet lo be fully ascertained. Granting pre-arrest bail at this stage may hamper the investigation, particularly when the petitioner is alleged to have acted in concert with other accused persons. Moreover, the nature of the allegations, involving assault on multiple victims, use of rods and sticks, causing grievous injuries, and threats to life, are grave and serious in nature. Therefore, at this stage, this CourL is not inclined to grant pre- arrest bail to the petitioner and the same is liable to be dismissed.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous applications, i[ any pending, shall stand closed To //TRUE COPY// Sd/. P.PONAM KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / SECTION OFFICER

1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate (Prohibition and Excise) at Sangareddy District.

2. The SHO Patancheru Police Station, Hyderabad, Hyderabad District. 3. One CC to SRl. M SALEEM Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad IOUTI.

5. Two CD Copies PK/PR \ L-o ,t1\ ) i HIGH COURT DATED:1211212025 CRLP.No.15670 ot 2025 r'f i'1. 1 o 1l rtt l|,?i, -)4. ::) )t ^.* ..)/ ' ',t1'c'--'.-::/ : -.:i--' CRIMINAL PEITITION IS DISMISSED. @- -l /--