Vagadda @ Vagugadda Praveen 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.4263 of 2026 DATE: 02.04.2026 BETWEEN:

Vagadda @ Vagugadda Praveen .....petitioner/accused No.1 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 seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner, on bail, who is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.17 of 2026 before the Dudyal Town Police Station, Vikarabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 115(2), 352 read with 3(5) of BNS and

Section 3 (1) ® (s) and 3 (2) (v) (9) of SC/STs (POA) Amendment Act, 2015.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the de facto complainant, on 24.02.2026, lodged a complaint before the police stating that she had been acquainted with the petitioner for several years, and that he exploited her physically under the guise of marriage. It is further alleged that the petitioner took an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from her. When she insisted on marriage, the petitioner refused and also assaulted her. It is further stated that when the parents of the de facto complainant went to the house of the accused, they were abused in the name of caste and in filthy language. In view of the same, a case was registered under the relevant sections, and the petitioner was arrayed as Accused No.1. 3.

Heard Sri R.Prashanth, 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 allegations against the petitioner are false, and that the relationship between the parties was consensual. It is further

contended that there was no promise of marriage, and that the complaint has been lodged only to extract money from the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 28.02.2026. Therefore, he prayed that this Court may be pleased to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing the criminal petition.

5.

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, contending that the offences alleged are grave and heinous in nature. It is further submitted that notice has already been served on the victim. Therefore, he prayed that this Court may be pleased to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

6.

In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner is in jail since 28.02.2026. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the incarceration period 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 learned Judicial First Class Magistrate at Kondalgal, Vikarabad District.

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: 02.04.2026 SPD

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4263 of 2026 Date: 02.04.2026 SPD