Sri.Kalukuntla Anjaneyulu, 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.4565 of 2026 DATE: 07.04.2026 BETWEEN:

Sri Kalukuntla Anjaneyulu .....Petitioner/Accused AND State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/Complainant

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNSS"), seeking grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/sole accused in Crime No.100 of 2026 on the file of Chikkadpally Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 115 (2), 352, 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNS").

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the de facto complainant lodged a report on 16.03.2026 stating that she belongs to SC (Mala) community and in the year 2016, she came into contact with the petitioner/accused through a common friend by name Shirisha. It is alleged that the accused developed a close relationship with her on the promise of marriage and took her to his rented room, where they had physical relationship, which continued for several years. It is further stated that, during the course of the said relationship, she became pregnant and subsequently terminated the pregnancy. It is alleged that when the complainant insisted upon marriage, the accused started avoiding her. Further, on 14.03.2026 at 05.00 p.m., when the accused came to meet the complainant, she again insisted on marriage, upon which the accused allegedly abused her in filthy language and threatened her with dire consequences. Based on the said report, the above crime was registered against the petitioner.

3.

Heard Sri P. Srikar Reddy, 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 contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the relationship between the petitioner and the de facto complainant was consensual in nature and continued for several years, and therefore, the question of inducement on a false promise of marriage does not arise. It is further contended that there was no dishonest intention on the part of the petitioner at the inception of the relationship, and the allegations made in the complaint do not constitute the offences alleged against him. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr.Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v. the Sate of Maharashtra and others in Criminal Appeal No.1443 of 2018 in support of his contentions. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any conditions imposed by this Court. Learned counsel, therefore, prayed this

Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner by allowing the 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 are grave and serious in nature. It is further contended that the material on record prima facie discloses that the petitioner had no intention to marry the complainant from the very inception and has exploited her emotionally and physically. The conduct of the petitioner in avoiding the complainant when she insisted upon marriage clearly establishes his dishonest intention. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submits that the acts of the petitioner have caused not only physical and mental trauma to the complainant but also amount to serious offences under the provisions of BNS, and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail.

6.

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner and the de facto complainant

entered into a consensual relationship over several years. Considering the nature of the allegations, the age and antecedents of the petitioner, and the fact that the investigation can proceed without custodial interrogation, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be granted pre-arrest bail. 7.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed, the petitioner/Accused shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.100 of 2026 on the file of Chikkadpally Police Station, Hyderabad, subject to the following conditions: i.

The petitioner shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Chikkadpally Police Station, Hyderabad, within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release him on bail on executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/-, each with two sureties, for the like sum each.

ii.

The petitioner shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.

iii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Investigating Officer on every Monday between 09:00 a.m, and 05:00 p.m., for a period of eight (8) weeks or till the filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier and thereafter, as and when required.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 07.04.2026 PRN

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4565 of 2026 Date: 07.04.2026 PRN