Vishal Reddy v. State Of Telangana
ilp [3168 |
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY : PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1858 OF 2020 Between:
Vishal Reddy S/o Narayana Reddy Petitioner/Accused No. 3 AND State ofTelangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad. Respondents/Complainant Petition under Sections 437 & 439 ofCr. P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner/A3 on bail in connection with Crime No. 101 of 2020 of P.S., Buchupally, Cyberabad. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri A. Ananthasen Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent, the Court made the following. OR.DER:
HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.1858 of 2O2O ORDER:
Petitioner, who is ,{3 in Cr.No.101 of 2O2O on the file of the S.H.O. Bachupally Police Station, Cyberabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 328, 354-8, 354-C, 384, 392 and 506 r/w 120(8) IPC and 25 (1)(A) of Arms Act and 67 A of ITA Act, 2005, filed this petition under Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular baii.
2.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent State.
3.
The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant is acquainted with A,1 through face book and when she came to India on 31.10.2018, ,{1 picked her from the airport and dropped her at Chintalkunta. After two days, she met with A1 to A3 at a Restaurant in Kukatpaliy and she felt drowsy while she was taking cool drink offered by A1 and immediately, she was taken to the house of A1. It is further alleged that at about 5.00 PM, when she woke up, she noticed that she was lying on the bed without clothes. It is further alleged that A1 took the nude photographs/videos of the de facto complainant while she was unconscious, as such, she requested him to delete the said photographs from his mobile and went away. It is
further alleged that after one week, she was taken by 41 forcibly to Yadagirigutta and tied yellow thread to get an impression that she was married to A,1 and also took an amount of Rs.3 lakhs cash and cheque books and ATM cards from her. She left to USA on 31.11.2018. It is further alleged that she visited India in March, 2019 and at that time, A1 threatened her and took away pan card, Aadhar card and aiso withdrawn an amount of Rs.22 iakhs through ATM. Again she visited India in the month of November, 2019 and met A1 and requested him to delete the nude photographs. Basing on her complaint, police registered the above case.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as seen from the contents of the remand report and other statements, there are absolutely no aliegations against the petitioner except saying that at the time of presence of the de facto complainant and A1 in the Restaurant and while offering cool drink by A1 to the complainant, the present petitioner was also present in the said Restaurant. He further submits that A2 was already released on bail by another bench of this Court, vide order, dated 2O.O3.2O2O in Crl.P.No.1798 of 2O2O. He further submits that the role of the present petitioner is almost similar to that of A2 and on the ground of parity, the present petitioner is also entitled for bail.
"{ On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State vehemently opposed the bail application, but conceded the fact that no allegations whatsoever have been leveled against the petitioner and on the ground ol parity, the present petitioner may also be enlarged on bail.
6.
Looking into the nature of allegations leveled against the petitioner and also taking into consideration the gravity of the offence alleged against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner on certain terms and conditions.
\ 7.
Accordingly, the Criminai Petition is allowed and the petitioner/ A3 sha1l be released on bail on the following terms and conditions:
(i) on the petitioner/A3 executing a personal bond for Rs.20,O0O/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the II Addl. Junior Civil Judge-cum-X Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Kukatpally, Cyberabad;
(ii) that the petitioner shall not interfere with the investigation directly or indirectly.
(iii) that the petitioner shall appear before the Station House Officer, Bachupally Police Station, on every Sunday between 10.00 AM and 5.OO PM till filing of charge sheet and co-operate with the investigating agency;
As a sequel, miscellaneousletitions pending' if any' shall stand closed *r(.
I SD/. N. CT{ANDRASEK RA RAO ASSISTANT GI R //TRUE COPYII S l. The XIV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Kukatpally
2. The II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Kukatpally, Cyberabad
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Cherlapally, Ranga Reddy District
4. The Station House Officer, Bachupally Police Station, Cyberabad
5. Two CC to Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad(OUT)
6. One CC to Sri A. Ananthasen Reddy, Advocate (OPUC)
7. One spare copy i OFFICER To, i l i i I I I !
:
-( HIGH COURT GSDJ DATED: 2310312020 OITDER ClU,P.No.1858 of 2020 BAIL ?3mn20t Eilt t \ ((