Kum.Swagath Roy, 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.3267 OF 2026 DATE : 13.03.2026 Between :
Swagath Roy.
...
Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep., by the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad.
... Respondent : ORDER :
This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.219 of 2025 before the Madhapur Police Station, Rangareddy District.
2.
The brief facts of the case are that on 02.02.2026 at about 2130 hours, the complainant/victim visited her friend Swagata Roy's PG room at Hitex Inn Co-living PG, Kondapur, where she was introduced to Sahil Singh. After consuming food and vodka,
the complainant became unconscious and later experienced sexual assault. On the following morning, she again felt inappropriate touching and found herself partially undressed. Subsequently, Sahil Singh sent her nude videos and photographs, threatened to circulate them among her friends and on social media, and coerced her into further sexual acts. The complainant recovered deleted messages evidencing threats and confessions of rape. Based on her petition, a case in Crime No.219/2026 was registered under Sections 64, 75, 77, 78, 351(2) BNS and Sections 66(E), 67(A) of the IT Act, and investigation was entrusted to the Inspector of Police. 3.
Heard Sri Chandrasekhar Yadav, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent - State. 4.
Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He contended that the FIR and complaint clearly attribute allegations against Accused No.1, and not against the petitioner. He averred that the petitioner is a woman, a law-abiding citizen, and was a classmate of the victim during M.Pharmacy at GITAM University, she has no connection with the alleged offence, has deep social roots, and is working in a private company. While
advocating that the investigation is complete, all materials have been seized, and the victim's statement recorded, he prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner.
5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail stating that the allegations in the FIR disclose serious offences involving sexual assault, criminal intimidation, and misuse of electronic communication. He averred that the gravity of the offences, coupled with the threats and blackmail through electronic media, necessitate custodial interrogation. Therefore, he prayed this Court to dismiss the criminal petition. 6.
Upon consideration of the rival submissions and perusal of the material available on record, it is noted that considering the facts and circumstances of the case in entirety, this Court is of the view to grant the relief of bail to petitioner, subject to compliance of following conditions:
i.
The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-, each (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge cum X Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rangareddy District, at 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: 13.03.2026 PT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3267 of 2026 Date: 13.03.2026 PT