Smt. V. Mamatha Nandini v. The State Of Telangana
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.6074 of 2025 ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner Nos.1 to 6/accused Nos.4 to 9 in Crime No.266 of 2025 on the file of the P.S.Jagtial Town, Jagtial District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 80 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short DPA).
2.
The case of prosecution is that on 23.04.2025, the father of the deceased filed a complaint stating that he had married his daughter to Gangadhari Tirupathi on 27.01.2023, giving Rs. 10 lakhs and gold as dowry, with the remaining 45 lakhs pending for a house. The complainant alleges that his daughter was mentally and physically tortured by her husband, in-laws, and their family members over six months, and harassed for additional dowry. It was also claimed that they quarreled over the fair complexion of their son. On 23.04.2025, he found his daughter locked in her bedroom and unresponsive after
shouting at the door. Then he broke it and found his daughter inside hanging to ceiling fan, immediately they removed her and shifted to Jagtial Government Hospital, but duty doctor came around 6-30 P.M. and after examination he stated she died. It is alleged that his daughter committed suicide due to the harassment of her husband parents-in-law, sisters-in-law and their husbands. Basing on the same, crime No.266 of 2025 was registered.
3.
Heard Mr.M.V.Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Arun Kumar Dodla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent -State.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners have not committed the alleged offences and they were falsely implicated in the above crime. He further submitted that the petitioners never harassed the deceased physically or mentally to bring the additional dowry and hence, the ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted against the petitioners. He further submitted that petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 5/accused Nos.4, 6 and 8 are sisters of the accused No.1 and petitioner Nos.2, 4 and 6/accused Nos.5, 7 and 9 are brothers-in-law of accuses No.1. He further
submitted that the de-facto complainant with an intention to harass all the relatives of accused No.1, impleaded the petitioners in the present crime. He further submitted that petitioner Nos.1, 3 and 5/accused Nos.4, 6 and 8 are housewives; petitioner No.2/accused No.5 is Head Constable; petitioner No.4/accused No.7 is Army Jawan at Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir and petitioner No.6/accused No.9 is Singareni Employee. He further submitted that the entire allegations are alleged against accused No.1 only. He further submitted that the petitioners are not having any other criminal antecedents and they are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and also abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court, and hence, prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.
5.
Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner Nos.1 to 6/accused Nos.4 to 9 has committed grave offence and investigation is under progress and if petitioner Nos.1 to 6/accused Nos.4 to 9 are granted anticipatory bail at this stage, they will influence the witnesses, and hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.
6.
Having considered the rival submissions made by respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that petitioner Nos.1 to 6/accused Nos.4 to 9 are relatives of accused No.1. The records further reveals that petitioner No.2/accused No.5 is Head Constable; petitioner No.4/accused No.7 is Army Jawan at Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir and petitioner No.6/accused No.9 is Singareni Employee and other petitioners are housewives. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, entire allegations are levelled against accused No.1 and at no point of time, the petitioners demanded for additional dowry and the petitioners are not having any other criminal antecedents.
7.
Taking into consideration the said facts, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner Nos.1 to 6/accused Nos.4 to 9 subject to the following conditions:
1. The petitioner Nos.1 to 6/accused Nos.4 to 9 shall surrender before the Station House Officer of P.S.Jagtial Town, Jagtial District, on or before 13.05.2025, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release the petitioner Nos.1 to 6/accused Nos.4 to 9 on bail on their executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- each (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties, for the like sum each.
2. After release, the petitioner Nos.1 to 3, 5 and 6/accused Nos.4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 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.
3. After release, the petitioner Nos.1 to 6/accused Nos.4 to 9 shall not influence the witnesses or interfere with the investigation.
4. The petitioner Nos.1 to 6/accused Nos.4 to 9 shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482 (2) of BNSS and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.
8.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO Date: 07.05.2025 Vsl/sa