Karan 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.3799 of 2026 DATE: 23.03.2026 Between:
Karan Singh
...Petitioner/A.6
AND The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Pubic Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana.
Hyderabad.
Through PS Jawahar Nagar.
.... Respondent
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.6 seeking to enlarge him on bail in connection with Crime No.1383 of 2025 on the file of Jawaharnagar Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126 (2), 103 (2) read with 3 (5) and 61 fo the BNS, Sections 25 (1)(A), 27 (3) of the Arms Act.
- 2 - 2.
Heard Sri Santosh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.6 and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-State.
3.
The case of the prosecution is that the complainant lodged a complaint on 08.12.2025 stating that on 08.12.2025 at about 7:45 AM the deceased Ghanta Ratnam Kumar @ Ghanta Venkata Ratna Kumar after dropping his daughter at school while he was returning to home on the way near road opposite to Tennis Court, the accused persons came in an auto and bike, intercepted the deceased, attacked with knives and also fired with weapons indiscriminately and killed and thereby committed the aforesaid offence. Hence, the complainant requested the police to take necessary action against the accused persons. Basing on the same, police registered a case against the accused for the aforesaid offences.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.6 would submit that the petitioner is not present at the scene of offence. Even according to the prosecution case, the petitioner has been falsely implicated due to confession made by
- 3 - accused No.1 before the police. Except that there is no seizure of arms from the possession of the petitioner and that other accused were already granted bail and hence, he requested the Court to grant regular bail to the petitioner-accused No.6. 5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the same and submits that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are severe in nature; that other accused were already granted bail; that even after mandatory period, no charge sheet is not filed is not a ground to grant bail and hence, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both parties and perusal of the material on record, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 29.12.2026 It appears that no charge sheet is filed till day. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and duration of incarceration of the petitioner in judicial custody, this Court deems it fit to grant regular bail to the petitioner/accused No.6 subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner-Accused No.6 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 X
- 4 - Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Cyberabad, Medical.
(ii) On such release, the petitioner-accused No.6 shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., on every Wednesday 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-Accused No.6 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480 (3) of BNSS).
7.
Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 23.03.2026 YVL