Thuniki Shekar, 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.8088 of 2026 DATE: 12.06.2026 Between:
Sri Thuniki Shekar S/o Ramesh.
.... Petitioner/ Accused No.1 AND The State of Telangana, Rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad Through SHO Boinpalli PS Rajanna Sircilla District and Another.
.... 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 petitioner/Accused No.1 seeking to enlarge him on bail in connection with Crime No.30 of 2026 of Boinpalli Police Station, Rajanna Sircilla District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 318 (4), 296 (b) read with 49 of the BNS and Section 3 (i)(s)(r) of the SCs&STs (POA) Act and Section 10 and 24 of the EA Act. 2.
The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant lodged a report before police on 05.02.2026,
wherein it is stated that about one year back her son got acquaintance with accused No.1 who stated to her son that he is Gulf Agent and lured her son to send to Saudi Arabia Country for employment. Believing his words, her son paid net cash of Rs.3,00,000/- to accused No.1 24.06.2025. Accused No.1 sent her son to Saudi Arabia but there was no employment to her son for a period of one month and later her son was dropped in an isolated place for about 500 kms for selling the liquor clandestinely and on one day police conducted a raid on the den and arrested her son and others, booked a case against them and sent them to jail. It is further stated that her son approached accused No.1 several time in that regard and she finally on 06.10.2025 accused No.1 came to her house and demanded to give Rs.2,00,000/- to him so that he would get release her son. She expressed her inability to arrange such amount, accused No.1 abused her in filthy language in the name of her caste. Hence, she requested the police to take necessary action.
3.
Heard Sri Mahipal Reddy.P, learned counsel for the petitioner/Accused No.1 and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-State.
4.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against him. The allegation against the son of the complainant is that as he consumed liquor, he was arrested by the police and there is no such abuse as alleged by the complainant; that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 12.05.2026; that entire investigation has been completed, further interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary, hence, he prays this Court to grant bail to the petitioner.
5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the same and submits that the allegation levelled against the petitioner serious in nature; that he scolded the complainant in the name of caste and also cheated the complainant and her son; investigation is not yet completed. However, he submits that notice is served on the victim.
6.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both parties and perusal of the material on record, the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 12.05.2026. As seen from the record, L.Ws1 to 12 were examined. Considering the period of incarceration of the petitioner in
judicial custody and progress in investigation, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner/Accused No.1 subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner-accused No.1 shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Vemulawada. (ii) On such release, the petitioner-accused No.1 shall appear before the concerned S.H.O. 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 petitioner-accused No.1 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: 12.06.2026 YVL