Md. Amjad Khan @ Amjad, 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.8427 of 2026 DATE: 19.06.2026 BETWEEN:

Md. Amjad Khan @ Amjad .....petitioner/accused 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 in Crime No.119 of 2026 before the Bahadurpura Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offence punishable under

Sections 64(2)(f) of BNS and Section 3 read with 4 of POCSO Act.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the victim girl, daughter of the complainant, was allegedly lured by the petitioner/accused Amjad on 18.04.2026 under the pretext of financial help. He allegedly called her to Kishan Bagh, gave her money, and then took her in his car to an isolated place where he committed sexual assault against her will. Later, he dropped her at MD Collections, Kishan Bagh. The complaint was lodged the next morning after consultation with relatives, leading to registration of FIR No.119/2026 under Section 64(2)(f) BNS and Section 3 r/w 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. 3.

Heard Sri Mohd Bilal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted the accused is innocent and has been falsely implicated and that the prosecution case rests solely on the statements of the complainant and victim without independent corroboration.

No CCTV footage, GPS, mobile tower location, or electronic evidence has been collected to substantiate the allegations. The counsel emphasized that medical and forensic evidence is inconclusive, the FIR was lodged after deliberation, and the petitioner has clean antecedents, permanent residence, and strong family ties. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition. 5.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail, contending that the allegations are grave and pertain to sexual assault on a minor under the POCSO Act, which is a serious offence affecting society at large and that the victim's statement clearly implicates the petitioner and the complaint was lodged promptly after the incident. 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 20.04.2026. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed and L.Ws.1 to 14 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 petitioner, 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 Special Court for trial of POSCO Act-cum-XII Additional Sessions Judge, 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: 19.06.2026 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.8427 of 2026 Date: 19.06.2026 SAI