Jaggila Sandeep, v. The State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.2260, 2267 and 2273 of 2026 DATE: 20.02.2026 Crl.P.No.2260 of 2026 BETWEEN:

Andhumalla Arun @ Minnu and 3 others .....petitioner/accused Nos.14 to 17 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant Crl.P.No.2267 of 2026 BETWEEN:

Choukat Shankar @ Bolu and 3 others .....petitioner/accused Nos.10 to 13 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana,

at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant Crl.P.No.2273 of 2026 BETWEEN:

Jaggila Sandeep and 2 others .....petitioner/accused Nos.18 to 20 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant COMMON ORDER These Criminal Petitions are filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioners on bail who are arrayed as accused Nos.10 to 20 in Crime No.13 of 2026 before the Kamtipura Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 118 (1), 126 (2), 324 (2), 326 (f) read with 3(5) of BNS.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the de facto complainant lodged a report before the Police on 15.01.2026 alleging that, on the night of 14.01.2026, unknown persons

stopped vehicles near Puranapool Darwaza Circle, pelted stones, caused injuries to the complainant, damaged vehicles, and allegedly attempted to set fire to a scooter. Based on the complaint, Crime No.13 of 2026 was registered under Sections 118(1), 126(2), 324(2), 326(f) read with 3(5) of the BNS against unknown persons. The Petitioners were already in judicial custody in Crime No.12 of 2026 relating to the same incident on a different complaint and were later taken into custody in the present crime on PT warrants. Though they were granted bail in Crime No.12 of 2026, their bail application in Crime No.13 of 2026 was dismissed by the trial Court. 3.

Heard Sri Gummalla Bhasker Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in Crl.P.No.2260 of 2026, Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in Crl.P.No.2267 of 2026 and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in Crl.P.No.2273 of 2026 as well as Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegations against the Petitioners were general and omnibus

in nature without any specific overt acts attributed to them. Except for Section 326(f) BNS, all other offences were punishable with imprisonment below seven years, and the applicability of Section 326(f) was a matter for trial. He further submitted that no incriminating material was recovered from the Petitioners, no Test Identification Parade was conducted, and the alleged electronic evidence lacked mandatory certification. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioners by allowing these Criminal Petitions.

5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the allegations against the Petitioners were serious in nature and arose out of a violent incident involving unlawful assembly, stone pelting, damage to public and private property, and an attempt to set a vehicle ablaze, which caused injuries to the complainant. He submitted that Section 326(f) of the BNS, carrying a higher punishment, was rightly invoked considering the gravity of the offence. He further submitted that the investigation is not yet completed. At this stage, granting of bail to the petitioners does not arise.

Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss these Criminal Petitions.

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 15.01.2026. As seen from the record, the petitioners herein are the accused and Crime No.12 of 2026 with the similar allegations, only the de-facto complainants are different in all the crimes and earlier on 19.01.2026 in Crime No.12 of 2026, they were already granted bail and there are no new allegations against the petitioners in the present crimes. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, 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.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the XIV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad.

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, these Criminal petitions are allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 20.02.2026 pld

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 2260, 2267 and 2273 of 2026 Date: 20.02.2026 pld