Lunavath Roop Singh 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.3302 of 2026 DATE: 16.03.2026 Between:
Lunavath Roop Singh
...Petitioner/accused No.1
AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, Through SHO, Medipaly Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate.
.... Respondent
O R D E R
This Criminal Petition is filed before this Court for grant of bail to the Petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.1 in FIR No.130 of 2026 of Medipally Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 105, 318(4) of the BNS, Sections 23 and 41 of the Clinical Establishment Act and Section 15(2) of the Medical Council of India (Indian Medical Council Act, 1956).
- 2 - 2.
The case of the prosecution is that, on 27.01s.2026, the de-facto complainant lodged a report before the police stating that, on 26.01.2026, when the deceased was suffering from fever and body pains then his wife took him to nearest clinic. After examining the deceased, the RMP doctor treated him and given one injection to his hip, immediately foam started coming out from the deceased mouth and his face started swelling, on seeing this his wife went to home in rush and informed to the complainant. Immediately complainant went to the clinic and seen RMP doctor is trying to do CPR to the deceased and after sometime ambulance came to the clinic and then complainant along with his brother, mother and doctor altogether taken deceased to the hospital and after 20 minutes of treatment doctor declared that deceased was succumbed to death.
Further, the complainant suspected that his father has expired due to an adverse reaction caused by the injection administered by an RMP doctor. Hence, the complainant requested to take necessary action. Basing on the said complaint, the police registered a case for the above said offences. 3.
Heard Sri Katravath Devender, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachandra
- 3 - Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the said allegations and no such injection was given to the deceased and immediately he suggested the de-facto complainant and wife of the deceased to shift him to the hospital and he is falsely implicated in this case and he is in jail since 27.01.2026 and the material part of the investigation was already completed. Therefore, he 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 the allegations against the petitioner herein are serious in nature and because of the petitioner herein, the deceased died and he is not authorized to give any treatment and he gave injection to the deceased and the investigation is not yet completed, as such, at this stage, he is not entitled for the bail and prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
- 4 - 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 27.01.2026. As seen from the remand case diary, the prosecution witnesses, LWs 1 to 16 have already been examined and the PME report is not yet received and the material part of the investigation was already completed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation and 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.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, MedchalMalkajgiri District, Malkajgiri at Kushaiguda.
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
- 5 - 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: 16.03.2026 TU
- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3302 OF 2026 DATE : 16.03.2026 TU