Eldasari Praveen v. The State Of Telangana, Through Sho Mallial Police Station, Jagtial District

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.140 of 2026 DATE: 23.01.2026 BETWEEN:

Eldasari Praveen .....petitioner/accused No.1 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.381 of 2025 before the Mallilal

Police Station, Jagitial, registered for the offences punishable under Section 336(3), 338, 340(2) read with 3(5) of BNS. 2.

The brief facts of the case are that the de facto complainant, Sri K. Vasantha, Tahsildar and Executive Magistrate, Mallial Mandal, lodged a report on 04.12.2025 alleging that prior to 07.11.2025, accused No.2 approached accused No.1, who was working as GPO, to unlawfully insert her name in respect of Ac.2.20 guntas of land situated in Sy.No.290/9 of Thatipalli Village in the official pahani records. It was alleged that accused No.1, by abusing his official position, tampered with and forged the revenue records of Thatipalli Village and dishonestly made such entries, thereby cheating the complainant.

3.

Heard Sri Alluri Divakar Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of 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 petitioner was innocent and had been falsely implicated as

accused No.1 without any material evidence. He further submitted that the petitioner was working as GPO of Balvanthapur Village and had never worked in Thatipalli Village, and therefore the question of tampering with the revenue records of Thatipalli Village did not arise. He contended that the ingredients of the alleged offences were not attracted, that the petitioner had no criminal antecedents, and that he was apprehending illegal arrest despite there being no cogent material against him. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition.

5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that there were clear allegations against the petitioner that accused No.2 approached him for entering her name in the revenue records, that he received money, and that he tampered with the official records. He further submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner was necessary. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

6.

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, and upon a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner was appointed as a Grama Panchayat Officer (GPO) in September, 2025. The proceedings placed on record by the petitioner indicate that, during the relevant period, another GPO was assigned to Thatipalli Village, whereas the petitioner was working as GPO of Balvanthapur Village. The allegation against the petitioner is that he tampered with the revenue records of Thatipalli Village, though he was not posted as GPO of the said village. Further, the investigation in the present case is primarily based on documentary evidence, and custodial interrogation of the petitioner does not appear to be necessary at this stage. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it fit to grant prearrest bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: i.

The petitioner shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Mallial Police Station, Jagitial District, within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release him on bail on

executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/-, with two sureties, for the like sum each.

ii.

The petitioner shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.

iii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Investigating Officer on every Monday between 09:00 a.m, and 05:00 p.m., for a period of eight (8) weeks or till the filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier and thereafter, as and when required.

7.

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 23.01.2026 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.140 of 2026 ` Date: 23.01.2026 SAI