Chinta Ravindhar Reddy @ Chintha Ravinder Reddy, v. The State Of Telangana,
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.159 OF 2026 23.01.2026 Between :
Chinta Ravindhar Reddy @ Chintha Ravinder Reddy ...
Petitioner/A.1 And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad ...
Respondent : ORDER :
This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, by petitioner/A.1 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.351 of 2025 of Toopran Police Station, Medak District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 329(3), 118(1), 115(2), 352 r/w.3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS').
- 2 - 2.
The case of the prosecution is that on 13.10.2025 at 9:15 PM, the complainant- Gangumalla Aravindh Reddy lodged a complaint with the police stating that about three years ago, he and his partners had purchased 12 acres of agricultural land in Survey Nos.88 and 90 of Brahmanpally Village, Toopran mandal, from Venkatarami Reddy and Madhusudhan Reddy. They took possession of the land and built precast boundary walls. On 13.10.2025 at about 2:00 PM, while the complainant, along with G. Vijaybhaskar Reddy and K. Krishnareddy, was conducting a land survey, a group of individuals Chinta Ravindhar Reddy, Chinta Madhusudhan Reddy, Chinta Jaipal Reddy, Chinta Narsareddy, Shiva Anjaiah, Shiva Nelluru, Shiva Ravi, and others allegedly trespassed into their land. Chinta Ravindhar Reddy claimed that 23 guntas of land in Survey No.
30 of Venkatapur village had been registered in his name by the previous owner, Venkatarami Reddy, he verbally abused and physically assaulted the complainant and his companions using hands and sticks. As a result, the complainant sustained injuries to his left wrist and right hand, while Vijaybhaskar Reddy and Krishnareddy suffered injuries to their right hands and left wrists.
- 3 - action. Basing on the said complaint, the police registered a case against the accused for the alleged offences. 3.
Heard Ms. Verose Sanjana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the other accused in this crime are already released on bail and the subject matter is purely civil in nature. He further contended that petitioner suffered from Paralysis and he had cardiac problem. Petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail stating that the allegations leveled against the petitioner are serious in nature. The accused have assaulted the defacto complainant and others causing injuries to them and investigation is not yet completed. Further petitioner herein is a habitual offender involved in committing land trespass, committing offences against persons, property and Government authority. As such, petitioner is not entitled for bail and prayed this Court to dismiss this criminal petition.
- 4 - 6.
Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and the material placed on record, though the earlier bail petition is dismissed by this Court on the ground that petitioner is involved in 14 crimes, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is suffering with serious illness, and he is a paralytic patient. Petitioner also filed documents to show that he is suffering with cardiac problem and also paralysis and admitted in hospital for several times.
Considering the medical grounds of the petitioner, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions :
i.
The petitioner/A.1 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Toopran Police Station, Medak District within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release the petitioner on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, for the like sum each.
ii.
The petitioner/A.1 shall appear before the concerned SHO between 09.00 a.m and 05.00 p.m., on every Wednesday and Saturday for a period of eight (8) weeks, for the purpose of investigation or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier and thereafter, as and when required.
iii.
The petitioner/A.1 shall abide by other conditions stipulated in Section 482 (2) of
- 5 - BNSS and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.
7.
Accordingly, Criminal Petition is allowed.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date :23.01.2026 Rds
- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.159 OF 2026 DATE :23.01.2026 Rds