Paravastu Jaganatham Raghunath v. The State Of Telangana
THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2709 OF 2026 DATE :09.03.2026 Between :
Paravastu Jaganatham Raghunath and another ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 And The State of Telangana, through Through the SHO, P.S. Nacharam Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad ... Respondent : ORDER :
This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, by the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.787 of 2025 of Nacharam Police Station, Rachakonda.
The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 316 (2), 318 (4) and 340 (2) r/w.3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2.
The facts of the case are that the de-facto complainant lodged a complaint before police on 30.12.2025 stating that both the petitioners are employees of their company and the bank statements of the accused and other employees/ relatives revealed that dealer payments were collected in cash / UPI,
while only partial amounts were remitted to the company and the remaining amounts were misappropriated. The accused also allegedly sold the company material to third parties without authorization and due to these illegal acts, the company suffered a financial loss exceeding Rs.1.5 corers. Hence, the defacto complainant requested the police for taking necessary action, basing on the same, Police registered the case against the accused for the above offences.
3.
Heard Sri Nikhil Chainani, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri M. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State. 4.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that petitioners are innocent of the said allegations and even according to the complainant-company it is only a civil dispute and the same is converted into a Criminal Case. He further contended that the punishment prescribed for the offences leveled against the petitioners is below 7 years and the Investigating Authority must serve notice under Section 35 (3) of BNSS, therefore, custodial interrogation of petitioners is not required. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to cooperate with the investigation and prayed this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that notice under Section 35 (3) of BNSS is served on petitioner No.2/ A-2. He further submitted that as the allegations leveled against the accused are serious in nature and their custodial interrogation is required to enquire about the misappropriated amounts by the petitioners. Therefore, they are not entitled for anticipatory bail and as the investigation is not yet completed requested this Court to dismiss the petition. 6.
Considering the submissions made by both the parties and the material on record this Court observed that the petitioners are misappropriated an amount of Rs.1.5 crores pertaining to defacto complainant-company showing the names of other employees cheques and they stipened that amount to their account, whereas material goes to show that it is misappropriation made by the petitioners in the said company and the amount was taken by the petitioners but there is no mention with regard to the date of misappropriation. In that view of the matter, this Court deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions: i.
The petitioners shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Nacharam Police Station, Rachakonda within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release the petitioners on bail on their executing personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties, for the like sum each.
ii. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned SHO between 09.00 a.m and 5.00 p.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) weeks, for the purpose of investigation or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier and thereafter, as and when required.
iii. The petitioners shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482 (2) of BNSS and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.
7.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 09.03.2026 PN
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2709 OF 2026 Date: 09.03.2026 PN