Jogunuri Rajesh 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.655 of 2026 DATE: 05.02.2026 BETWEEN:

Jogunri Rajesh and others .....petitioners/accused Nos.1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 22 and 23 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 petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos.1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 22 and 23 in Crime No.3 of 2026

before the Thungathurthy Police Station, Suryapet District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 132, 191(2), 191(3), 324(3) read with 190 of BNS and Section 3 of PDPP Act.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the incident occurred on 06.01.2026 at Ravulapally village when police personnel attempted to shift the dead body of Jogunuri Lazarus for postmortem, during which a law and order situation arose. It was alleged that a large number of villagers attacked the police personnel and damaged police vehicles. The FIR mechanically named 23 persons, including the petitioners, and the petitioners, who were family members of the deceased and villagers.

3.

Heard Sri P. Shashidhar Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegations in the FIR were vague and omnibus and did not disclose the ingredients of the alleged offences, as no specific

overt act, use of weapons, or damage to public property was attributed to the petitioners. He further submitted that the petitioners had no criminal antecedents and were poor persons belonging to the Scheduled Caste community, and that the registration of the FIR was an abuse of process arising out of long-standing land disputes and village rivalry with Smt. Ketireddy Sujanya Reddy and her family. He contended that mere presence at the scene did not constitute an offence and that continuation of the proceedings would cause irreparable hardship and amount to misuse of criminal law. 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 petitioners stating that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are serious in nature. Further, the investigation was not yet completed. Therefore, at this stage, granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners does not arise. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition. 6.

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and upon a perusal of the

material available on record, it appears that though the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that no such incident had occurred, the instructions placed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor prima facie disclose an attack on police personnel while they were discharging official duties. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner Nos.1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 against whom serious allegations are levelled. However, considering the age of petitioner No.7, who is arrayed as accused No.23, and the fact that petitioner No.2 is the wife of Accused No.1, this Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to petitioner Nos.2 and 7, subject to the following conditions:

i.

The petitioner Nos.2 and 7/accused Nos.2 and 23 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Thungathurthy Police Station, Suryapet District, within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release them on bail on executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/-, each with two sureties, for the like sum each.

ii.

The petitioner Nos.2 and 7/accused Nos.2 and 23 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 Nos.2 and 7/accused Nos.2 and 23 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 in part. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 05.02.2026 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.655 of 2026 ` Date: 05.02.2026 SAI