Kicha @Pandra Rajyalakshmi v. The State Of Telangana,
[ 34851
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8117 OF 2026 Between:
Kicha @ Pandra Rajyalakshmi, Wo.Veerabhadra Rao @ K.V.Rao, aged 40 years, Occ. Housewife, Rl/o. Flat No.202, Rajeev Swagruha Apartment Bandlaguda, Nagole.
...Petitioner/Accused No.2
AND The State of Telangana, rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad through P.S Nagole - Hyderabad ...RespondenUComplainant Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail in connection with F.l.R No. 155 oI 2026 on the file of P.S Nagole -Hyderabad, U/section 316(5), 318(4) r/w 3(5) BNS, 3,5 OF TSPDFEA Act.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Prudhvi Raj Mudunuri, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO AL PETITION No.81 DATE OF -o4-0,6.20.26 TiISINIIsT5N Kicha @ Pandra Rajyalakshmi Petitioner/Accused No.2 AND The State of Telangana ... Respondent ORDER:
1.
This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNSS"), seeking to grant bail to the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.2 in Crime No.155 of 2026, on the file r>f Nagole Police Station, Makajgiri Commissionerate. The offences alleged against the petitioner/accused No.2 are under Sections 316(5), 318(4) read with 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3 & 5 of Telangana State Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999.
2.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.2 as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State.
3.
The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/accused No.2 along with other accused, induced the victims to invest money in the
rname of "VR Trading Services" by promising returns ranging from 10% to 160/o per month and after collecting the deposits, they initially paid partial returns to some victims, but subsequently failed to repay the amounts.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.2 contended that the petitioner is innocent and has no connection with the alleged commission of offence. He further stated that the petitioner/accused No.2 has been languishing in judicial custody since O1.O4.2026 and is no way connected with the "VR Trading Company" and has been falsely implicated at the instance of accused No.4 without there being any material on record.
5.
Evidently, the entire gamut of factual matrix would show that the petitioner/accused No.2 along with other accused collected more than Rs.30 crores from about 27O investors and routed the funds through various bank accounts and instead of utilizing the same for genuine business purposes, the said funds were misappropriated for personal and family benefits. The petitioner/accused No.2 along with other accused, with a common intention for illegal gain, allegedly cheated various public by running an illegal investment scheme thereby causing wrongful loss to the victims and wrongful gain to themselves.
6.
In that view of the matter, the assertion of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that investigation is going on, appears to be germane {
and valid. More so, many of the other accused are absconding and the relevant evidences have to be investigated. In such circumstances, enlarging the petitioner at this stage is detrimental to the investigation. Thus, the present criminal petition seeking to enlarge the petitioner on bail is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 1.
In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, petitioner/accused No.2 is at liberty to move appropriate application to the jail authorities so as to show that she is handicapped. On such application being moved, if the circumstances stated by the petitioner/accused No.2 are correct, the respondent jail authorities shall provide such facilities as required to the petitioner/accused No.2, being a women and handicapped B.
Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/. C.DEEPIKA ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR //TRUE COPY// S CTION OFFICER
1. The I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-t Additional udicial Magistrate of First To, Class, LB ar, Ranga Reddy Nag The Station House Officer, Nagole police Station, Malkajgiri Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad tourl M . One CC to Sri prudhvi Raj Mudunuri, Advocate [OpUC] . Two CD Copies ABK/GNK
HIGH COURT DATED: 0410612026 VACATION COURT 1 HE sTA \ oU 0 I JUtl Zm !oz * * /'!€SPATf.
ORDER
CRLP.No.8117 ot 2026 DISMISSlNG THE CRIMINAL PETITION t V il,