Mamidipally Hemalatha, v. State Of Telangana,
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2225 OF 2026 DATE: 25.02.2026 Between:
Mamidipally Hemalatha & another
...Petitioners/A.2 & A.3
And The State of Telangana, Through Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad ... Respondent/Complainant
ORDER
This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioners on bail who are arrayed as accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.73 of 2026 of Armoor Police Station, Nizamabad District.
The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 85 and 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2.
The brief facts of the case are that on 05.02.2026 at about 14:05 hours, the complainant, Gundaveni Sai Krishna Goud, lodged a report stating that his sister Sagarika, aged 35 years, was married to Mamidipally Ravikanth and was given Rs.15 lakhs and gold as dowry at the time of marriage. They had two children. He stated that for the past five years, Ravikanth, his parents, and sisters had been harassing Sagarika for an additional dowry of Rs.20 lakhs. Though panchayats were held and Rs.2 lakhs was paid, the harassment continued. On 05.02.2026 at about 11:30 hours, they were informed that Sagarika had committed suicide by hanging in her house at Armoor. Alleging that she died due to dowry harassment by her husband and his family, the complainant sought action, and police registered a case against the accused.
3.
Heard Sri K.Mohan Goud, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.
4.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners have not committed any offence and that the deceased was suffering with ill-health which might be the reason for her committing suicide. Petitioners herein have also supported the deceased. The allegations leveled against the petitioners are false and there is no evidence for the allegations made against them. The petitioners herein are aged about 69 and 76 respectively and most of the investigation is completed except filing of charge sheet. The petitioners are in jail from 14.02.2026 and hence, prayed this Court to grant regular bail to the petitioners. 5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail stating that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are serious in nature. Due to the dowry harassment, the deceased had committed suicide. Hence, petitioners are not entitled for bail and prayed to dismiss this petition.
6.
In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioners are in jail since
14.02.2026. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed and L.Ws.1 to 08 witnesses have been examined.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the incarceration period of the petitioners, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions: i.
The petitioners 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 Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Armoor.
ii.
The petitioners shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) week or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.
iii.
The petitioners 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 applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 25.02.2026 SAI
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2225 of 2026 Date: 25.02.2026 SAI