Mohammed Mahboob Shaikh 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.505 of 2026 DATE: 22.01.2026 Between:
Mohammed Mahboob Shaikh and another .... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.
.... Respondent/Complainant
O R D E R
This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking their enlargement on bail in connection with Crime No.280 of 2025 of Tappachabutra Police Station, Hyderabad District. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143(2), 316, 318(4), 351(2), 352 r/w 3(5) of the BNS.
- 2 - 2.
The brief facts of the case are that, on 07.11.2025, the defacto complainant lodged a report before the police stating that in December, 2024, her husband was introduced to accused who promised to arrange overseas employment with visas for Georgia in exchange for Rs.4,35,000/- Trusting their repeated assurances, he paid Rs.4,00,000/- online in December, 2024, agreeing to pay the balance after visa arrangements. Despite multiple follow-ups, they failed to provide the visas within the promised 20 days. In February 2025, the accused instructed her husband to travel to Qatar, claiming their agent would hand over the visas there. He paid an additional amount of Rs.4,70,000/- and travelled to Qatar.
However, upon arrival, he was placed in cramped, unhygienic rooms with poor ventilation and inadequate sleeping arrangements and after nearly two months in Qatar, the accused demanded an additional amount of Rs.80,000/- to arrange the visa from Armenia. He paid and travelled to Armenia at his own cost. There, they pressured him to work illegally under poor conditions without pay and visa for the said work and the Armenian authorities deported him to India on 07.06.2025, adding to his misery and hardship. Hence, she requested to take necessary action. Basing on the same, the police registered a case for the above said offences.
- 3 - 3.
Heard Sri P. Rana Kamalasan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are innocent of the said allegations and they are in jail since 23.12.2025 and the material part of the investigation has already been completed and whatever the allegations are against accused No.3 and he is shown as absconding and accused No.3 is from Hyderabad and according to accused No.3, he sent husband of the de-facto complainant to Qatar. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required in this case and prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioners. 5.
On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, contending that the allegations against the petitioners are serious in nature and the petitioner here are accused Nos.1 and 2 lured the de-facto complainant under the guise of arranging overseas employment with visas for Georgia and thereafter, they sent her husband to Qatar without any visa and as such, he was deported to India by the Armenian authorities and the investigation is not yet completed and accused No.3 is absconding and prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
- 4 - 6.
In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon a perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the petitioners are in jail since 23.12.2025 and as seen from the record, accused Nos.1 and 2 are residents from Maharashtra and accused No.3 is from Hyderabad and even according to the de-facto complainant, she approached accused No.2 for the said employment and the amount was taken by accused No.2 and handed over to accused No.1 and accused No.1 given the same to accused No.3 and accused No.3 sent the victim to Qatar. As recorded in the remand case diary, the prosecution witnesses LWs.1 to 11 have already been examined. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, including the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the duration of incarceration and also the allegations against the petitioners herein, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2, subject to the following conditions:
i.
The petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Sessions Judge, at Hyderabad.
- 5 - ii.
The petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every week or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.
iii.
The petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
(presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).
7.
Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 22.01.2026 TU
- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.505 OF 2026 DATE : 22.01.2026 TU