Kondakindi Yashwanth Reddy, 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.2952 OF 2026 DATE : 16.03.2026 Between :
Kondakindi Yashwanth Reddy ...
Petitioner/Accused And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad, Through P.S. Meerpet ... Respondent/Complainant : ORDER :
This criminal petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, by the petitioner/Accused praying to enlarge him on bail in connection with FIR No.45 of 2026 of Meerpet Police Station, Rachakonda District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Section 80, 85 and 86 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- 2 - 2.
The facts of the case are that on 09.01.2026 at about 14:40 hours, the complainant gave a complaint stating that after the death of his younger brother Krishna Reddy, he had been taking care of his brother's family and in 2023 performed the marriage of his niece Sushma (the deceased) with the accused. The couple resided at Flat No.301, Hastinapuram, along with their infant son Yashwanth Nandan Reddy (aged 11 months) and Sushma's mother Lalitha. On 08.01.2026 at about 20:22 hours, the accused made a video call to the complainant showing that Sushma had allegedly committed suicide by hanging from a ceiling fan and that the infant was also found dead at the same place. He further informed that Lalitha had consumed some unknown poison and was unconscious, later shifted to hospital where her condition remained serious. The deceased and her child were allegedly brought down by the accused and taken to Osmania Hospital. Suspecting foul play in the deaths of Sushma and her son, the complainant requested for necessary legal action against the accused. 3.
Heard Sri Mahesh Mamindla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri E.Srinivasa Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant and Sri M.Ramachandra
- 3 - Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 17.02.2026 and was not present at the time of the alleged suicide, having left home at 10:30 a.m. on 08.01.2026 for a client meeting and returned at 19:45 hours, and found the bedroom door locked from inside by the deceased. He contended that there is no allegation of dowry demand in the FIR, RCD, or witness statements, and reliance is placed on Charan Singh @ Charanjit Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand1 wherein it was held that mere unnatural death of a wife within seven years of marriage is insufficient for conviction under Section 80 BNS. Learned Counsel further submits that there were no disputes between the couple, the deceased was an educated and employed woman capable of lodging a complaint if harassed, by the petitioner. Hence, prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner.
5.
On the other hand, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant opposed bail, contending that the petitioner's 1 (2023) INSC 404,
- 4 - family threatened the deceased's mother while she was undergoing treatment, compelling her to initially give a statement in favour of the accused, which she later retracted. Further, even from jail the petitioner is influencing witnesses, and that due to his harassment two persons have died while another is struggling for life. The Additional Public Prosecutor also opposes bail, contending that the deceased and her child committed suicide due to the petitioner's harassment, and if released on bail he may threaten witnesses. Hence, prayed to dismiss this petition.
6.
Upon considering submissions and perusing the record, it is noted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 17.01.2026 and the material shows that an altercation took place between the petitioner and the deceased, leading to her suicide. Initially, there was no allegation of dowry demand prior to the death. Considering the allegations against the petitioner the progress in investigation and the period of incarceration of petitioner in jail, this Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner/Accused 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 the VIII-Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. 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, the 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.2952 OF 2026 DATE :16.03.2026 Rds