Nagelly Srikanth Reddy Alias Srikanth, v. State Of Telangana,
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4680 of 2026 DATE: 07.04.2026 Between:
Nagelly Srikanth Reddy
...Petitioner/accused
AND The State of Telangana, Through SHO, Dundigal Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.
.... Respondent/Prosecution
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 in FIR No.33 of 2026 of Dundigal Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 69 and 318(4) of the BNS.
- 2 - 2.
The case of the prosecution is that, on 13.01.2026, the de-facto complainant lodged a report before the police stating that she acquainted with the petitioner herein and met him in Shaadi.com and thereafter, they developed relationship and under the guise of marriage, the petitioner herein exploited her physically and when she insisted for marriage, he refused to marry the de-facto complainant. 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 Malchalme Hari Vastav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachandra 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 whatever the relationship between them is a consensual relationship and both are majors on the date of such relationship and only to harass the petitioner herein, a false case is lodged against the petitioner and the petitioner is aged about 28 years and de-facto complainant is aged about 30 years, as such, she is matured on the date of the alleged incident to take decision and he is in jail
- 3 - since 10.03.2026 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 and heinous in nature, as such, at this stage, he is not entitled for the bail and prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
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 10.03.2026. As seen from the remand case diary, the prosecution witnesses, LWs 1 to 10 have already been examined. 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
- 4 - Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned VIII AJFC, Medchal.
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 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: 07.04.2026 TU
- 5 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4680 OF 2026 DATE : 07.04.2026 TU