Dr Anoop Mehta v. The State Of Talangana

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3120 of 2025 ORDER:

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.2 in Crime No.270 of 2025 of Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the complainant's husband, Bantu Nagesh, was a businessman who leased several hospitals and owned plots of land. About a year ago, he mortgaged one of their plots to Shekhar Lolam for 30 lakhs and later mortgaged four more plots for 75 lakhs. However, Shekhar Lolam, in collusion with others, sold the plots without returning them, causing Bantu Nagesh significant financial and mental distress. When confronted, they refused to listen, and on February 22, 2025, Bantu Nagesh was found dead in his bedroom. The complainant requests action against Shekhar Lolam, Gulja Indrakaran Reddy, Sammi Reddy, Dr.

Anoop Mehatha, and others for causing her husband's death by selling their plots without their consent 3.

Heard Sri U.V. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri Syed Yasar Manoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner is a government doctor at Gandhi Hospital, he was wrongly arrested and remanded to judicial custody on February 28, 2025. He was picked up from his hospital on February 27, 2025, without being informed of any pending case against him. He further submitted that the petitioner is a bona fide purchaser of plots from the accused and has no connection to the deceased. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition. 5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that the investigation is not yet completed, making it premature to consider granting bail. Further, the de facto complainant alleged that accused Nos. 2-4 conspired with accused No.1 to cheat the deceased, leading to his

suicide. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6.

After considering submissions from both the parties and reviewing the material available on record, it appears that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he purchased the subject property from accused No.1. Further, in the suicide note of the deceased, there are no specific allegations against the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it fit 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 sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned VII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Hayatnagar, Ranga Reddy District.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Sunday for a period of eight (8) week 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: 05.03.2025 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3120 of 2025 Date: 05.03.2025 SAI