Mohammed Akram @ Akram, 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.6808 of 2026 DATE: 01.05.2026 Between:
Mohammed Akram @ Akram S/o Mohammed Ismail & another.
.... Petitioners/ Accused Nos.1&2 AND The State of Telangana, Rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad. .... 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 petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking to enlarge them on bail in connection with Crime No.41 of 2026 of Rein Bazar Police Station, Mirchowk Division, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 318 (4), 316 (2) read with 3 (5) BNS, Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999 and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the
- 2 - Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 2.
The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant lodged a report before police on 10.03.2026, wherein it is stated that in August, 2025, while she was watching Instagram reels, she came into contact with one Numaan Raza, who later introduced her to Shoieb Irfan, who offered her a work from home business opportunity and directed her to come to office at Achievers Club, Saroor Nagar, Ranga Reddy. On 31.08.2025, she paid Rs.30,000/- in cash at the office and received certain healthcare products. Subsequently she underwent online training and was instructed to recruit others into the business. Acting on their directions, five persons joined through her and paid total Rs.1,50,000/- to Shoieb Irfan via online transactions. Additionally the complainant paid another Rs.60,000/- in cash for a manager level post. After collecting the amounts, the said Shoieb stopped responding to her calls and messages and she is facing continuous pressure from the persons who joined through her seeking refund of their money, causing her mental distress. The accused persons have dishonestly
- 3 - cheated the complainant and others inducing them to pay amounts under false promises. Hence, she requested to take necessary action against the accused persons. Basing on the same, police registered a case for the aforesaid offences. 3.
Heard Sri Mohd Muzaferullah Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner/Accused and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-State.
4.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 is that the petitioners are innocent of the offences alleged against them; that the allegations made by the complainant are nothing but false; that the Company and Director of the Company are not made as parties herein; that the petitioners have been in judicial custody from 25.03.2026; that after registration of this case, the police also registered similar cases against the petitioners at Mir Chowk Police Station and Madhapur Police Station and that material part of investigation is completed and L.Ws.1 to 13 were already examined and hence, he prays to grant regular bail to the petitioners.
- 4 - 5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the same and submits that there are several victims i.e., 300 persons were cheated in the hands of the petitioners; that A.1 and A.2 under the guise of selling goods, they were involved in several illegal cases; that the money relating several victims were involved in this case and that it is illegal that without completion of investigation, at this stage, the petitioners are not entitled for bail and hence, he requested the Court to dismiss the petition. 6.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both parties and perusal of the material on record, the petitioner has been in judicial since 25.03.2026 and L.Ws.1 to 11 were already examined. Even according to the complainant she received health products when she paid Rs.30,000/-. Considering the nature of allegations and the period of incarceration of the petitioners in judicial custody, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 shall execute 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 learned Sessions Judge, Red Hills, Nampally, Hyderabad.
- 5 - (ii) On such release, the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 shall appear before the concerned SHO between 09:00 a.m., and 5:00 p.m., on every Wednesday 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 petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 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: 01.05.2026 YVL