Gundepurarri Parijatha v. State Of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2502 of 2025 ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of prearrest bail to the petitioner in Crime No.768 of 2024 of Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the Directors of Pudami Infra Projects i.e., accused Nos.1 and 2, along with marketing director i.e., accused No.3, approached the de-facto complainant and induced him to invest in their company by promising to return double the amount deposited and registering a plot as security. The de-facto complainant, believing their promises, became the Deputy General Manager and was responsible for bringing in customers. He, along with 16 other Deputy General Managers (DGMs) and 150 marketing staff, collected a total of Rs.36 crores from customers. The company, through its Vanasthalipuram branch, collected Rs.7,09,00,000/- from the complainant's customers alone.

However, the company paid only Rs.9,27,18,518/- to customers and registered plots worth

Rs.13,15,52,118/-, leaving an outstanding due Rs.22,37,47,882/-. Despite repeated requests from the complainant and other DGMs, the company directors procrastinated and failed to return the remaining amount to the customers. On receipt of the said complaint, the Police registered a case against the petitioners vide Crime No.768 of 2024 before the Vanasthalipuram Police, Rachakonda, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 read with 34 of the IPC and Section 5 of the TSPDFEA.

3.

Heard Sri T.Venkateshwarlu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner firstly submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has nothing to do with the allegations made against her. He secondly submitted that the petitioner was initially customer of the company established by Accused No.1 to 5, and was later employed as Deputy General Manager to mobilize customers. He thirdly submitted that the petitioner was not involved in the financial matters of the company and did not intentionally induce customers to deposit money, and as a matter of fact, the petitioner was also victimized by Accused Nos.1 to 4 and had lodged a complaint

against them. He fourthly submitted that mere employment of petitioner with the company cannot make her accused, and that the ingredients of Section 406, 420, r/w 34 IPC & 5 of TSPDFEA do not attract against the petitioner. He lastly submitted that the petitioner is resident of Yadadri Bhongir District, with movable and immovable properties, and is willing to furnish sureties as directed and prayed the Court to grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner, stating that as per the complaint averments the amounts involved in this case are huge and many customers were being cheated under the guise of higher returns, who became victimized by the false promises made by the company and their employees. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

6.

Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that the limited grievance of learned counsel for petitioner is that petitioner is no way connected with the offence as alleged, which involves huge sums of money, whereas, it is the specific stand of learned Additional Public Prosecutor that as per the

averments of complaint, serious allegations are leveled against her.

7.

On meticulously perusing the record, this Court is of the firm view that as per the complaint averments, primary and specific set of allegations are against accused Nos.1 to 3, and that the petitioner herself was initially customers of the company established by the accused Nos.1 to 5. Therefore, the petitioner is granted pre-arrest bail, subject to compliance of the following conditions:

i.

The petitioner shall surrender before the Station House Officer P.S.Vanasthalipuram, Rachakonda Commissionerate, 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/- with two sureties, for the like sum each.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Station House Officer on every Monday between 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., for a period of eight (08)

weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier.

iii.

The petitioner shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 05.03.2025 gms

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2502 of 2025 Date: 05.03.2025 gms