Pinneti Suresh Kumar v. State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3047 of 2026 DATE: 10.03.2026 Between:

Pinneti Suresh Kumar ..... Petitioner/Accused No.7 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, Through EOW Police Station, Cyberabad.

.....Respondent/complainant : ORDER :

This Criminal Petition is filed before this Court for grant of bail to the Petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.7 in FIR No.2 of 2026 of EOW Cyb (Cyberabad) Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), r/w 61 of the BNS and Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, on 20.01.2026, the de-facto complainant lodged a report before the police stating that the complainant along with family got in acquaintance with the A.1 and believing his words, the complainant arranged a meeting in his house inviting all his family members where in A.1 induced them to invest with his companies to gain good returns every month. Believing his words, the complainant and his family members approached A.4-A.7 and invested a total amount of Rs. 8.5 crores. It is further alleged that A.1 and his company paid them returns as promised after signing an MOU with A4 & A5 and got the returns till Aug 2024. Further, the payments were stopped. Hence, he requested for taking necessary action. Basing on the said complaint, the police registered a case for the above said offences.

3.

Heard Sri B. Bhagath Sain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent -State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, even as per the complaint itself, there is no such deposit made by

the complainant and even according to the de-facto complainant, whatever, the amount invested in the business, is an investment in the business and it is not a deposit. Hence, the offence under Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 is not applicable to the present case and the remaining offences are punishable below seven years and he is in jail since 05.02.2026 and the material part of the investigation was already completed and the police custody of the Petitioner herein is already taken by the investigating authority and examined the same, therefore, there is no such investigation is pending to remain the petitioner in the jail. It is further submitted that accused Nos.1 and 2 were already granted anticipatory bail by this Court. As such, the petitioner herein is entitled for the bail and prayed the Court to grant bail to him 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 it is a huge financial fraud and Rs.8.5 Crores is involved in this case. Further, the petitioner herein has also induced more than 110 innocent

persons in depositing the amounts and they did not revealed where that amount is send by the petitioner and in view of the police custody, he is not revealing the bank accounts or other details for further investigation, therefore, he is not entitled for the bail and 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 05.02.2026 and as seen from the record, even according to the de-facto complainant, he invested the amount with the accused and also all the family members also invested the amount with accused Nos.4 and 7 and there is an MOU entered between the Petitioner herein and the de-facto complainant, wherein it is mentioned as a loan given to the petitioner. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the duration of incarceration, 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.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District, at L.

B. Nagar.

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).

iv.

The petitioner shall submit his record which is available with him to the

prosecution and also bank account details.

7.

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date :10.03.2026 TU

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3047 OF 2026 DATE :10.03.2026 TU