Al. Shaik Irfan Ahmed, 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.3670 of 2026 DATE: 17.03.2026 Between:
Shaik Irfan Ahmed .... Petitioner/ Accused No.1 AND The State of Telangana, Through Narsingi Police Station, R.R. District, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.
....Respondent (Complainant)
O R D E R
This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioner/Accused No.1 seeking to enlarge him on bail in dismissal of order passed in Crl.M.P.No.12 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.37 of 2025, dated 10.04.2025 on the file of learned XII Additional District Judge, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar, which is against the judgment, dated 04.12.2024 passed in C.C.No.2088 of 2023, passed by the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIII Additional Judicial
- 2 - Magistrate of First Class, Rangareddy District at Rajendranagar by suspending the sentence and conviction passed in the said Calendar Case.
2.
The learned trial Court proved the petitioner guilty of the offence under Section 392 of I.P.C. and accordingly vide judgment, dated 04.12.2024 in C.C.No.2088 of 2023 he was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- for the said offence. In default, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 submits that the bail application filed the petitioner before trial Court was dismissed on the ground that the name of the petitioner as father of petitioner's son, who is suffering from ill health, is not matching. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that even though there is no evidence on record to convict the petitioner, the learned trial Court erroneously convicted him. Furthermore, the petitioner is non-trial prisoner in the trial Court; that he is in judicial custody 12.06.2023 and the sentenced imposed by the learned trial Court is three years and therefore, requested the
- 3 - Court to suspend the sentence imposed the trial Court against the petitioner while granting bail to him. 4.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the same stating that the petitioner is a habitual offender and total there are 19 cases registered against him and out of 19 cases, in cases the petitioners was convicted and five cases he was convicted and remaining 10 cases are under trial. If the petitioner is released on bail, he will repeat and same offence and hence, he request the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
5.
Considering the submissions made by both the parties and perusal of the material on record, the petitioner is in judicial custody since 26.06.2024 and Judgment was passed on 04.12.2024. Considering the period of incarceration of petitioner in jail and the facts and circumstances, this Court deems it fit to suspend the sentence of imprisonment imposed against the petitioner while granting bail to the petitioner/Accused No.1 subject to the following conditions:
6.
The sentence the imposed against the petitioner/accused vide judgment, dated 04.12.2024 in
- 4 - C.C.No.2088 of 2023 passed by the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIII Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rangareddy District and he shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIII Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rangareddy District at Rajendranagar.
7.
Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 17.03.2026 TU
- 5 - THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3670 of 2026 Date:17.03.2026 TU