Dubba Sai Kuamr , v. The State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT

HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION No.7614 of 2026 Date: 14.05.2026 Between :

Dubba Sai Kumar ... Petitioner/Accused And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad.

... Respondent : ORDER :

This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, by the petitioner/Accused No.1 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.155 of 2026 of Kalwakurthy Police Station, Nagarkurnool. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 69, 89, 127(4), 352 read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant lodged a report before the Police on 23.04.2026, wherein she stated that she was acquainted with the accused No.1 through Instagram ID and continued and thereafter he proposed to her and she also accepted the proposal. After that, de-facto complainant and accused No.1 met at Kalwakurthy and

continue their relationship. In the year 2025, the accused No.1 had a physical relationship with the de-facto complainant and thereafter she got pregnant, on 25.02.2026 they went to Mallappa Gutta and performed marriage. After that, accused No.1 parents and relatives forcibly took the de-facto complainant from Talakondapally to Kalwakurthy to the house of their relatives, where she was wrongfully confined by the petitioners herein. After that the accused No.1 gave pills for abortion and threatened her to take the pills. On 12.03.2026, he allegedly attempted to force her to consume poison but she resisted and threw it away. Thereafter, the de-facto complainant and the accused No.1 stayed together in a rented room at Hyderabad for about one month. On 09.04.2026, the accused No.1 left for work and did not return for several days.

When later contacted, the accused No.1 he refused to continue the relationship stating that she had lodged a complaint against him. Hence, she requested the police to take necessary action, and based on the same, the Police registered the case against the accused for the above offences.

3.

Heard Sri Sai Aravind Eswara, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State.

4.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the marriage of de-facto complainant was performed with the petitioner/accused No.1 and only after marriage disputes arose between them. The said disputes does not attract Section 69 of the BNS. The relationship between the de-facto complainant and the petitioner is consensual in nature. He also submitted that petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition. 5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail stating that the offences alleged against the petitioner are serious in nature. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail and requested this Court to dismiss the petition.

6.

Considering the submissions made by both parties and the material available on record, it is observed that the petitioner and the de facto complainant are already married, and therefore Section 69 of the BNS is not attracted. In that view of the matter, this Court deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

i.

The petitioner shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Kalwakurthy Police Station, Nagarkurnool District within two weeks from today, and on such

surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release the petitioner on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties, for the like sum each.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO between 09.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) weeks, for the purpose of investigation or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier and thereafter, as and when required.

iii.

The petitioner shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482

(2) of BNSS and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.

7.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

___________________ E.V.VENUGOPAL,J Date: 14.05.2026 gv/sa