Milkuri Nagaraju v. The State Of Telangana
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 6692 of 2025 ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 read with 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) by the petitioner/accused seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.502 of 2025 of Jeedimetla Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offence punishable under Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
2.
The case of prosecution in brief is that the de facto complainant lodged a complaint on 12.05.2025 stating that the she created telugu matrimony profile, wherein she explained about her financial issues to the petitioner and the same was agreed by him and also wants to marry her and both roamed in the city. When the de facto complainant staying in Sai Women's Hostel, Balanagar, in the month of July 2024, the petitioner picked up her from hostel at 20:00 hours and took her away to the isolated place in Jeedimetla area and stopped the bike to talk and he committed sexual intercourse forcefully by saying she is his wife. Later, the petitioner promised that
within one week he will come with his parents and will marry her. When the de facto complainant called through phone, the petitioner postponed the marriage by saying that house construction work is going on and without any reasons, the petitioner blocked her phone number and tried to marry another woman. Hence, the complaint.
3.
Heard Mr. J. Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel, representing Mr. A. Divakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent State. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed the alleged offence and he was falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the alleged incident was occurred in July, 2024, whereas, the de facto has lodged the complaint on 12.05.2025 and she has not explained any reasons for the delay in lodging the complaint. Even according to the averments made in the complaint, the ingredients of Section 69 of the BNS are not attracted against the petitioner. The petitioner is a software employee and he is not having any
criminal antecedents. The petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and also abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court. Hence, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail. 5.
Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has committed grave offence and the investigation is under progress. At this stage, if the petitioner granted anticipatory bail, he will interfere with the investigation and influence the witnesses. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to seek anticipatory bail. 6.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal the material available on record, it reveals that the alleged offence took place in July, 2024, whereas the de facto complainant has lodged the complaint on 12.05.2025 without explaining any reasons for delay in the lodging the complaint. Even according to the learned Senior Counsel, the petitioner is a software employee and he is not having any criminal antecedents, which was not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
7.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused with the following conditions: (i) The petitioner/accused is directed to surrender before the S.H.O., Jeedimetla Police Station, on or before 23.06.2025 and on such surrender, he shall be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each.
(ii) On such release, the petitioner shall appear before the S.H.O., Jeedimetla Police Station, on every Saturday at 11:00 a.m. for a period of eight (8) weeks or till filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier.
(iii) The petitioner/accused shall not contact the de facto complainant or her family members in any manner. (iv) The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS and shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer in the investigation. 8.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.
______________________ J.SREENIVAS RAO, J Date: 12.06.2025 mar