Rathod Sagar, 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.3000 of 2026 DATE: 10.03.2026 Between:

Rathod Sagar .... Petitioner/ Accused AND The State of Telangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad and another.

.... Respondents Complainant

O R D E R

This criminal petition is filed under Sections 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioner/Accused seeking enlargement on bail in connection with Crime No.18 of 2026 of Kerameri Police Station, Kumuram Bheem Asifabad District. The offence alleged against the petitioner are under Section 109(1) of BNS.

- 2 - 2.

The brief facts of the case are that, on 03.02.2026, the defacto complainant lodged a report with the police stating that the petitioner herein attempted to kill the de-facto complainant and the petitioner herein dashed the car of the de-facto complainant from back side with his car and it is further stated that the petitioner herein would kill the de-facto complainant within a week and there is a life threat from the petitioner to the de-facto complainant. Hence, the complainant requested the police to take necessary action. Basing on the same, a case was registered for the alleged offence.

3.

Heard Smt. C. Vasundhara Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the said allegations and except suspicion, there is no material on record, to show that the petitioner herein attempted to kill the de-facto complainant and he is in jail since 06.02.2026 and the material part of the investigation was already completed and LWs 1 to 13 have already been examined, therefore, the alleged offence under Section 109(1) of the BNS is not applicable to the present case. Hence, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner.

- 3 - 5.

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner stating that the allegations against the petitioner herein are serious in nature and though no injuries were sustained by the de facto complainant, the intention itself is sufficient to constitute the offence under Section 109(1) of the BNS. Further, the investigation is not yet completed. Therefore, he 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 06.02.2026. As seen from the remand case diary, the prosecution witnesses, LWs 1 to 13 have already been examined. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the duration of incarceration and also that the charge sheet is not filed, 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 sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal

- 4 - Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Asifabad.

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: 10.03.2026 TU

- 5 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3000 OF 2026 DATE : 10.03.2026 TU