Lingampally Ravali, 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.1756 of 2026 DATE: 23.02.2026 BETWEEN:

Lingampally Ravali .....petitioner/accused No.2 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.2 in Crime No.04 of before the

Thungathurthy Police Station, Suryapet District, registered for the offences punishable under Section 108 read with 3(5) of BNS.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that on 10.01.2026 at about 09:30 hours, the son of the complainant, namely Mahesh, died while undergoing treatment at Osmania Hospital after consuming pesticide on 01.01.2026 due to alleged mental distress. The complainant, Lingampally Mallamma, lodged a report on the same day at 20:00 hours before Thungathurthy Police Station stating that her daughter-in-law, Ravali (Accused No.2), had developed an illicit relationship with Gundla Sanjay, which led to disputes between the deceased and his wife. It was alleged that the deceased was humiliated and mentally disturbed due to the conduct of his wife and her alleged relationship, which ultimately drove him to consume pesticide.

3.

Heard Sri D. Srikanth, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita were not made out, as there was no material showing any instigation, intentional aid, or active role of the petitioner in the alleged suicide. He further submitted that mere allegations of extra-marital relationship or matrimonial discord, even if assumed to be true, would not constitute abetment of suicide in the absence of a direct or proximate act compelling the deceased to take the extreme step. In support of his submissions, he relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it was argued that a clear mens rea and a positive act leading the deceased to commit suicide were necessary to attract the offence, which were absent in the present case. He further submitted that the deceased had independently purchased pesticide and consumed it, indicating a voluntary act without any immediate provocation. 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. He further submitted that the allegations in the complaint clearly disclosed that the petitioner had maintained an illicit relationship and subjected the deceased to mental harassment, which ultimately drove him to commit suicide, thereby attracting the alleged offence and that the investigation is 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 both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the main allegation against the petitioner is that she had developed an alleged illicit relationship with another person, which resulted in matrimonial disputes between her and the deceased, and that the deceased, being mentally disturbed due to such circumstances, consumed pesticide and later died while undergoing treatment. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that even if the allegations are taken at their face value, the essential ingredients of the

offence punishable under Section 108 of BNS are not made out, as there is no material to show any instigation, intentional aid, or active participation on the part of the petitioner which had a direct or proximate nexus with the alleged suicide. However, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor contended that the conduct of the petitioner had caused mental harassment to the deceased and thereby driven him to take the extreme step, and that the investigation is still pending. As seen from the record, admittedly there is no suicide note left by the deceased and the allegations are mainly based on the statements of the complainant regarding matrimonial disputes between the spouses. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

i.

The petitioner 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 her on bail on executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/-, each

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.

10.

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

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 23.02.2026 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1756 of 2026 Date: 23.02.2026 SAI