Chintala Vineeth, v. The State Of Telangana, Through The Sho, Gudimalkapur P.S.,
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.6349 of 2026 DATE: 27.04.2026 BETWEEN:
Chintala Vineeth, S/o. Ashok Kumar .....petitioner/accused And The State of Telangana, Through the S.H.O., Gudimalkapur P.S., Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. .....Respondent/complainant
ORDER
This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is the sole accused in Crime No.94 of 2026 of Gudimalkapur Police Station, Hyderabad.
The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable under Section 69 of BNS.
2.
The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant lodged a complaint before the Police on 09.03.2026 stating that she became acquainted with the petitioner, who is her senior in college. Over a period of time, their acquaintance developed into a close relationship. The petitioner is stated to have expressed his intention to marry the de facto complainant and assured her that his family members had no objection to their marriage. Believing the same, the de facto complainant introduced the petitioner to her family and continued the relationship. It is further stated that in February 2026, , the petitioner introduced the de facto complainant to his sister and brother-in-law. On 16.02.
2026, the petitioner asked the de facto complainant to come to his residence stating that he would introduce her to his friends and host a party there. Accordingly, the de facto complainant visited the petitioner's house and met his friends. Again on 19.02.2026, when the de facto complainant went to the petitioner's house in the absence of his parents, the petitioner insisted upon a physical relationship.
but later, upon persuasion by the petitioner, she consented and they had physical relations. It is alleged that they were involved in such relationship on more than one occasion. Subsequently, when the de facto complainant insisted upon marriage, the petitioner refused to marry her. Based on the said complaint, Crime No.94 of 2026 was registered for the above said offence.
3.
Heard Ms. Anuradha Cherukuri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in jail since 12.03.2026. The petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime. It is further contended that relationship between the petitioner and the de facto complainant was purely consensual in nature, arising out of their acquaintance. The de facto complainant, being a major, voluntarily entered into the relationship with the petitioner. It is further contended that as per the Remand Case Diary, dated 12.03.2026, LWs.2
to 5 were examined, the police witnesses (LW-8 to LW-11) have been examined and statement of de facto complainant has been recorded. The petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation and undertakes to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition. 5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition, submitting that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and heinous in nature. Having regard to the nature and gravity of allegations, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail at this stage and prays this Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 6.
In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner is in jail since 12.03.2026. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed and L.W.s.2 to 5 and L.W.s.8 to 11 (police witnesses) have been examined and statement of de facto complainant was recorded. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the incarceration
period of the petitioner, this Court deems it fit 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) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the XVI Chief Judicial Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad.
ii.
The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) week 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: 27.04.2026 Nsk
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.6349 of 2026 Date: 27.04.2026 Nsk