Kolluri Srikanth 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.1773 of 2026 DATE: 20.02.2026 BETWEEN:
Kolluri Srikanth .....petitioner/accused No.6 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.6 in Crime No.54 of 2025 before the EOW, Cyberabad Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 471, 472, 420 read with 34 of IPC.
2.
The brief facts of the case are that a CD file was received on 28.08.2025 from Narsingi Police Station in Crime No.746 of 2018, registered for the offences under Sections 468, 471, 472, 474 and 420 r/w 34 IPC, and the same was re-registered as Crime No.54 of 2025 on the file of EOW, Cyberabad, pursuant to the instructions of the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad. The case was based on a complaint lodged by Sri Md. Khadeer, who claimed to be the General Power of Attorney holder of the legal heirs of late Hyder Ali Mirza. The complainant alleged that the accused persons had created fake and forged documents by falsely representing that the Nizam-E-Atiyat Court had passed orders in their favour and had submitted such documents before the MRO, Gandipet, in succession proceedings, pursuant to which orders were initially passed.
It was further alleged that while the complainant obtained certified copies of land records consisting of 25 sheets from the State Archives, the accused produced a different set of 35 sheets, and that the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District, later cancelled the succession orders on the ground that the documents related to land situated at Malkajgiri belonging to third parties.
and attempt to grab the property, thereby committing offences of forgery and cheating.
3.
Heard Sri Katika Ravinder Reddy, 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 had submitted that the complaint was based on vague, omnibus and sweeping allegations without attributing any specific overt act to the petitioner and that the dispute essentially related to rival claims of title and succession over the subject land, which were already the subject matter of civil proceedings in O.S.No.506 of 1997 and A.S.No.610 of 1997, and also considered in W.P.Nos.3936, 3953, 4356 and 4359 of 2018, wherein this had held that the dispute was civil in nature. He further submitted that the petitioner neither forged nor used any fabricated document and that the documents relied upon were certified copies obtained from official sources including the State Archives. The re-registration of Crime No.746 of 2018 as Crime No.54 of 2025 after several years, without any fresh material, was contended to be an abuse of process.
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 had opposed the petition contending that the allegations disclosed a serious offence of forgery and fabrication of documents relating to valuable immovable property and that the accused persons had created and produced fabricated documents purportedly issued by the Nizam-E-Atiyat Court and State Archives in order to mislead the revenue authorities and obtain succession orders. He contended that the investigation was at an initial stage. Therefore, at this stage, granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner 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 arose out of a long-standing dispute relating to subject land, which had already been the subject matter of Crime No.746 of 2018 of Narsingi Police Station and was subsequently re-registered as Crime No.54 of 2025 on the file of EOW, Cyberabad. It was also brought to the notice of this
Court that the very same property was involved in W.P. Nos.3936, 3953, 4356 and 4359 of 2018, wherein by order dated 04.06.2019 the High Court had observed that the dispute was civil in nature, and that A.S. No.20 of 2003 and A.S. No.610 of 1997 were pending in respect of title and possession. Further, the petitioner had filed Cri.P.No.1058 of 2026 and obtained interim stay of further proceedings in FIR No.54 of 2025 on 02.02.2026. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the pendency of civil and writ proceedings, and the absence of specific overt acts attributed to the petitioner, 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, EOW, Cyberabad Police Station Station, Cyberabad, 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/-, 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: 20.02.2025 pld
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1773 of 2026 Date: 20.02.2026 pld