Smt. Jaggavarapu Brahma Gnana Prasanna 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.3129 of 2026 DATE: 23.03.2026 BETWEEN:

Jaggavarapu Brahma Gnana Prasanna .....petitioner/accused And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.1679 of 2025 before the Kukatpally Police Station,

Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) of BNS.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that on 24.12.2025 at about 06:00 hours the complainant, Smt. Doranala Sunitha, lodged a complaint stating that her younger brother Jaggavarapu Sudheer Reddy was married to the petitioner Prasanna in the year 2004 and they were blessed with two children. It is alleged that there used to be frequent disputes between the couple. On 24.12.2025 at about 00:30 hours, the petitioner informed the complainant over phone that her brother had died. On reaching the house, the complainant found her brother dead and the petitioner allegedly informed that he had fallen on the corner of a bed cot and died. Based on the complaint, a case was initially registered under Section 194 BNSS (suspicious death). Subsequently, in view of the post-mortem findings, the section of law was altered to Section 103(1) BNS alleging that the petitioner had strangulated the deceased with her chunni during a quarrel.

3.

Heard Sri V. Surender Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case at the instance of the family members of the deceased and that the deceased was habituated to consumption of alcohol and frequently harassed the petitioner and the children. He further submitted that the petitioner was arrested only on suspicion and the alleged confessional statement has been fabricated by the police and that the petitioner is a woman and the only adult member of the family taking care of her two minor children, one of whom is appearing for intermediate examinations and the other is suffering from autism requiring special medical care. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 19.01.2026 and the evidence in the case is mainly circumstantial in nature. 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 bail petition and submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature involving the death of her husband and that during the course of investigation, material evidence including postmortem findings and other circumstantial evidence indicates the involvement of the petitioner in the offence. Further, the investigation was not yet completed. At this stage, granting of bail to the petitioner does not arise. 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 a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner is a woman and the wife of the deceased and that the case is based mainly on circumstantial evidence. The main allegation against the petitioner is that during a quarrel she allegedly strangulated her husband with her chunni, resulting in his death. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner is the only adult member available to take care of her two minor children and that the younger son is suffering from autism and requires special medical care. The petitioner

has been in judicial custody since 19.01.2026 and the investigation is still in progress. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the health condition of the second son of the petitioner, 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) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the XII Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kukatpally.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday 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: 23.03.2026 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3129 of 2026 Date: 23.03.2026 SAI