Nanapuram Jay Raj Madiga 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.5641 of 2026 DATE: 21.04.2026 Between:

Nanapuram Jay Raj Madiga S/o N.Mallaiah.

... Petitioner/ Accused No.1 AND The State of Telangana, Rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

Through the Women Police Station, Central Crime Station, Detective Department. ... Respondent/ Complainant

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.1 seeking to enlarge him on bail in connection with C.C.No.14310 of 2019 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 of I.P.C and Section 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

- 2 - 2.

The petitioner is husband of the complainant. Due to disputes between the parties, the complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner and the same was registered as C.C.No.14310 of 2019 on the file of learned XIII Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahila Court, Hyderabad, and it is pending.

3.

Heard Sri MD.Nawaz Hyder Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner/A.1 and learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent.

4.

The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; that already charge sheet is filed, the question of tampering with the evidence does not arise; that petitioner was issued NBW and he was sent to judicial custody due to his absence. He further submits that the petitioner has been regularly attending before the Court and only one i.e., on 25.09.2025 he has not attended the Court, which is not neither deliberate nor intentional but due to genuine reasons and hence, he prays to his Court to grant bail to the petitioner by recalling NBW.

- 3 - 5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the same and submits that the offences alleged against the petitioners are grievous in nature; that the trial was pending since 2005; that as petitioner was not attended the Court on 25.09.2025, for which the learned trial Court issued NBW against the petitioner and hence, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both parties and upon perusal of the material on record, the petitioner was absent on 25.09.2025 except that on each and every date of hearing the petitioner has been attending the trial. According to the reasons mentioned by the petitioner, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner/A.1 subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner-accused No.1 shall execute 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 XIII Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally.

(ii) On such release, the petitioner-accused No.1 shall appear before the learned XIII Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally for trial of C.C.No.14310 of 2019 on each and every date of hearing. Further, since the Calendar Case is of the year 2019, the XIII Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally is directed to dispose of the said C.C. as expeditiously as possible.

- 4 - (iii) The petitioner-accused No.1 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: 21.04.2026 YVL