Banoth Ganesh v. The State Of Telangana, Through Sho, P.S. Vanasthalipuram

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2759 OF 2026 DATE : 16.03.2026 Between :

Banoth Ganesh ...

Petitioner/Accused And The State of Telangana, Through SHO, P.S.Vanasthalipuram, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad ... Respondent : ORDER :

This criminal petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, by petitioner/Accused praying to enlarge him on bail in connection with Crime No.64 of 2026 of Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Rachakonda District. The offences alleged against the petitioner

- 2 - are under Section 64, 318(4), 78, 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2.

The facts of the case are that on 10.01.2026 the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before police stating that in the year 2023 when she was studying Intermediate first year she received a request on her Instagram account from a person using the ID "mummy-mummy". After accepting the request, he introduced himself as Guguloth Ganesh and thereafter they started chatting on Instagram and spoke frequently over the phone. In May 2023, he proposed love to her and she accepted, and they continued to remain in contact. In 2025, after securing a seat in Vignan Institute of Management and Technology for Women, Ghatkesar, she came to Hyderabad on 20.08.2025 and stayed at her uncle's house at Manikeshwara Nagar, Tarnaka. On 15.09.

2025, the accused allegedly called her to his room at Hills Colony, Vanasthalipuram, where he forcibly had sexual intercourse with her.

- 3 - created another Instagram account through which he posted her private photographs and allegedly blackmailed and threatened her that he would kill her parents. Hence, the complainant requested the police to take necessary action against the accused basing on the same, the present crime is registered against the accused.

3.

Heard Sri N. Narsimulu, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondentState. 4.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the relationship between the petitioner and victim is a consensual relationship for over two years and that the victim continued the relationship even after knowing the true identity of the petitioner. Further, there is delay in lodging report and that most of the investigation is completed. Petitioner is in jail from 12.01.2026. Hence, prayed this Court to grant regular bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition. 5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail stating that the offence committed by the petitioner

- 4 - is very serious and heinous in nature. Lws.1 to 14 are examined and that statement of the victim under section 183 of BNSS is also recorded. If petitioner is released on bail he may threaten the complainant and may not cooperate with the investigation. Hence, petitioner is not entitled to bail and prayed to dismiss this petition.

6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is noted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 12.01.2026. The record further reveals that LWs.1 to 14 have already been examined, including the recording of statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS. It is also evident from the complaint that the complainant subsequently came to know that the petitioner and the victim are related as brother and sister. Further, there is a delay in lodging the report with the police. Having regard to these circumstances and the period of incarceration already undergone by the petitioner, this Court deems it appropriate to grant regular 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 sureties for a like sum each to the

- 5 - satisfaction of VII-Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District. ii. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO between 09.00 a.m and 5.00 p.m., on every Wednesday 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 483(2) of the BNSS.

7.

Accordingly, Criminal Petition is allowed.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date :16.03.2026 Rds

- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2759 OF 2026 DATE :16.03.2026 Rds