Shaik Nazeer Pasha v. The State Of Telangana
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.6881 of 2025 ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNSS') by petitioner/accused No.3, seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.54 of 2025 of Karepalli Police Station, Khammam District registered for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNS') and Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999.
2.
Heard Mr.Ujwal Babu, learned counsel, representing Mr.M.V.Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State.
3.
The case of prosecution in brief is that on 01.03.2025 at 19:30 hours the complainant Bhukya Mohan lodged a complaint stating that Nandru Sureslı R/o Karepally, Dondeti Sridevi R/o Tettelapadu, and Nazir Pasha R/o Musthafanagar, and G.
Naveen, R/o Musthafanagar, lured him to invest in a scheme called
"Meta Plus," claiming that if he invested Rs.1 lakh, he would receive R.5 lakhs in return. Believing their false promises, he transferred Rs.16 lakhs from his bank account to Suresh's account IFSC 923010039531558, starting from 26-05-2024, and additionally handed over Rs.9 lakhs in cash and in total Rs.25 lakhs. They assured that he would receive Rs.25,000/- per day for 300 days, which amounts to 1% daily returns. However, till date, he has not received any returns as promised. Whenever he asked them about the payments, they are postponing with various reasons and have been deliberately deceiving him. Now he realized that he had been cheated. In the same way Tirunagari Pavan R/o Karepally, Guguloth Ravindar, Vamshi and Chandu were also cheated by them. Basing on the said complaint, the present crime was registered for the aforesaid offences.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he was falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to the averments made in the complaint, the ingredients of Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 are not attracted
against the petitioner and except the said offence, all the other offences levelled against petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the victim deposited the amounts in the account of accused No.1 only and there are no specific allegations against the petitioner that he received any amount from the victim or from the accused No.1. Basing on the very same allegations, the other victim lodged a complaint and the same was registered as Crime No.90 of 2025, wherein the police were not added Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999. He further submitted that the petitioner is not having criminal antecedents and he is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and he will abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.
Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has committed a grave offence and the victim suffered in the hands of the petitioner and other accused and huge amounts were misappropriated by the petitioner and other accused and
the investigation is under progress. Therefore, if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, he will interfere with the investigation and influence the witnesses. Hence prays to dismiss the petition.
6.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that on the very same allegations against the petitioner and other accused, Crime No.90 of 2025 was registered for the offence punishable under Sections 296(a), 351(2), 324(2), 329(2), 318(4) r/w Section 3(5) of BNS. Whereas in the present crime, Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 was also added. Even according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the victim has deposited the amounts in the accounts of accused No.1 only and the petitioner has not received any amounts either from the victim or from accused No.1 and the same was not disputed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
7.
Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused No.3, subject to
the following conditions:
i) The petitioner/accused No.3 is directed to surrender before S.H.O., Karepalli Police Station, Khammam District on or before 25.06.2025 and on such surrender, the Station House Officer is directed to release the petitioner on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to his satisfaction.
ii) After release, the petitioner/accused No.3 shall appear before the concerned S.H.O. at 11-00 a.m. on every Monday for a period of eight weeks or till filing of charge sheet, whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation and thereafter, as and when required. iii) After release, the petitioner/accused No.3 shall not interfere with the investigation or influence the witnesses.
iv) After release, the petitioner/accused No.3 shall abide by the conditions stipulated under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
8.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this petition stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO Date: 17.06.2025 pgp