Sri Surineni Satish Rao, 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.8109 of 2026 DATE: 16.06.2026 BETWEEN:

Sruineni Satish Rao .....petitioner/accused No.1 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.84 of 2026 before the INSP ADMIN (DD) Police

Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS and Section 5 of TSPDFEA. 2.

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, founder of the GBK APY (GBK) digital token and proprietor of Janajyoti Parivar and ANJ Technologies, induced the de facto complainant and several others to invest substantial amounts in a blockchain-based token scheme by promising high returns, bonus income, and free real estate plots. It is alleged that the victims invested large sums based on such representations and later suffered losses when the token value fell and withdrawals became difficult. Basing on the same, the case was registered against the petitioner. The petitioner was arrested on 25.04.2026, remanded to judicial custody.

3.

Heard Sri S. Nagesh Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachander Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated and that

GBK is a decentralized blockchain token whose price is determined by market forces and cannot be manipulated by the petitioner. The transactions were purchases of digital assets and not deposits, thereby rendering the provisions of the TSPDFE Act inapplicable. He further submitted that cryptocurrency-related activities are legally recognized, the investigation is substantially complete, relevant records and devices have already been seized, and continued custody is unnecessary. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition. 5.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application, contending that the petitioner induced numerous investors to part with huge amounts of money by promising assured and unrealistic returns through the GBK token scheme. He further submitted that the allegations disclose a large-scale financial fraud affecting several victims across different States and involving substantial amounts. The prosecution further contended that the investigation is still in progress, more victims and financial transactions are being traced, and the petitioner, if released on bail, may influence witnesses, tamper with evidence, or hamper the ongoing

investigation. At this stage, granting of bail to the petitioner does not arise. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6.

In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner is in jail since 25.04.2026. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed and L.Ws.1 to 9 witnesses have been examined.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the incarceration period of the petitioner, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions: i.

The petitioner shall execute a 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 XII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) week or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

iii.

The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.(presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

7.

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

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 16.06.2026 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.8109 of 2026 Date: 16.06.2026 SAI