G. Narendar 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.2832 of 2026 DATE: 13.03.2026 BETWEEN:

G.Narendar, and others.

.....petitioners And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused in Crime No.64 of 2026 before the Medak Police

Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 132, 118(1) r/w 3(5) of BNS.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that on 10.02.2026 at 19:20 hours, the complainant, Sri Sabuvath Babulu, aged 38 years, Lambada caste, working as ARPC Gunman No.2268 attached to the MLA of Medak Constituency, Sri Minampally Rohit, lodged a written complaint at Medak Town Police Station. He stated that on 09.02.2026 at about 00:15 hours, while accompanying the MLA along with another gunman, driver, and PA to Pitlambase area, certain BRS party members obstructed them, argued with the MLA, and assaulted the complainant and others by pelting stones and beating with sticks, causing injuries. The complainant later identified the accused as Arella Ramagoud, Battula Prasad, Farhana, Srikanth, Lokesh, and others. Based on the complaint, Crime No.64/2026 was registered under Sections 132, 118(1), and 3(5) BNS, and investigation was entrusted to SI B. Murali. 3.

Heard Sri R.Chandrasekhar Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners, and Sri Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners are law-abiding citizens with good reputation and have been falsely implicated due to political rivalry, and that their names were not mentioned in the original complaint, nor were they arrayed as accused, and no prima facie case or evidence exists against them. He averred that the allegations are vague, baseless, and motivated by malice, intended only to harass them with threats of arrest. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners by allowing this Criminal Petition.

5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the investigation has already revealed incriminating material, including witness statements, seizure of stones used in the offence, and confessions of co-accused. Therefore, prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition. 6.

Having regard to the rival submissions made by both sides and upon perusal of the material available on record, it

is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that except the allegation against accused No.1 relating to castebased abuse, there are no specific allegations connecting the present petitioners with the alleged incident, much less with any intention to cause fatal injuries to the MLA. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would contend that the investigation has revealed incriminating material, including witness statements, seizure of stones used in the offence, and confessional statements of co-accused, and therefore the petitioners are not entitled to the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail.

7.

This Court, upon consideration of the material placed on record, notes that without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners, subject to appropriate conditions, to balance the interests of investigation with the personal liberty of the petitioners.

i.

The petitioners shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Medak Town Police Station, within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release them on bail on executing a personal bond for

Rs.25,000/-, each with two sureties, for the like sum each.

ii.

The petitioners shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.

iii.

The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Investigating Officer on every Monday and Wednesday between 09:00 a.m, and 05:00 p.m., for a period of eight

(8) weeks or till the filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier and thereafter, as and when required.

8.

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 13.03.2026 PT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2832 of 2026 ` Date: 13.03.2026 PT