Rathod Babu Rao v. The State Of Telangana

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT

HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2619 of 2026 DATE: 02.03.2026 Between:

Rathod Babu Rao .... Petitioner/ Accused No.2 AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

...Respondent/de-facto complainant

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition is filed before this Court for grant of bail to the Petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.2 in FIR No.110 of 2025 of Vatpally Police Station, Sangareddy District, registered for the offence punishable under Section 109 r/w 3(5) of the BNS.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, on 26.12.2025, the defacto complainant lodged a report before the police stating that accused No.1 is having illegal intimacy with the complainant's

- 2 - brother's wife and his brother threatened accused No.1 and at the time, when they were drinking alcohol and accused No.1 attempted to stab and kill the de-facto complainant with a knife and he tried to escape from the same and the petitioner herein caught him and thereafter, he escaped from the place of offence. Hence, the complainant requested to take necessary action. Basing on the said complaint, the police registered a case for the above said offences.

3.

Heard Smt. L. Pranathi Reedy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the said allegations and even according to the prosecution, the petitioner herein helped accused No.1 and he is in jail since 27.12.2025 and there are no specific allegations against the petitioner herein and the entire investigation was already completed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to him by allowing this criminal petition.

- 3 - 5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that both the accused are responsible for the offence punishable under Section 109 r/w 3(5) of the BNS and both the accused intended to kill the de-facto complainant, therefore, at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled for the bail and prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition. 6.

In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner herein is in jail since 27.12.2025. As seen from the remand case diary, the prosecution witnesses, LWs 1 to 8 including the investigating authority have already been examined and there are no injuries sustained by the victim and there is no question of stabbing and killing the de-facto complainant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the duration of incarceration, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: i.

The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two

- 4 - sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Andole, at Jogipet.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

iii.

The petitioner 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: 02.03.2026 tu

- 5 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2619 OF 2026 DATE : 02.03.2026 tu