Gunda Prashanth 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.5581 of 2026 DATE : 17.04.2026 Between:

Gunda Prashanth.

...Petitioner/Accused

AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

...Respondent

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed before this Court for grant of bail to the Petitioner who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.391 of 2026 of Uppal Police Station, Malkajgiri District, registered for the offences punishable under Section 69 of The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

2.

The brief facts of the case are that, on 23.03.2026, the de-facto complainant lodged a report before the police

stating that, she came into contact with the accused in 2020, who proposed marriage and on that promise, she developed a relationship with the accused. Believing his assurances, she entered into physical relationship with him on multiple occasions. The accused continued to promise marriage and even involved family members, but later stopped communication, blocked her, and ultimately refused to marry her.

The de-facto complainant on being deceived and exploited emotionally and physically on false promise of marriage, requested to take necessary action. Based on the said complaint, the police registered a case against the petitioner for the aforementioned offences.

3.

Heard Sri Soma Ravi Kiran Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the relationship between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant was consensual in nature and there is no such promise of marriage made by the petitioner to the

de-facto complainant. It is further submitted that there is a long standing relationship between the parties since, 2022. The petitioner is in jail from 24.03.2026 and the material part of the investigation is already completed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition. 5.

On the other hand, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor opposing the petition stating that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and heinous in nature and that the material part of the investigation is not yet completed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the 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 is in jail from 24.03.2026, who is arrayed as accused and as seen from the record, both the parties are major and that there is a long standing relationship between the parties since, 2022. 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 Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned VI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri at Medipally.

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: 17.04.2026 SRK

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.5581 of 2026 Date: 17.04.2026 SRK