Karthik Putha, 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.8435 of 2026 DATE: 22.06.2026 Between:
Karthik Putha .... Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana At Hyderabad.
.... Respondent/Complainant
O R D E R
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioner/accused seeking enlargement on bail in connection with Crime No.902 of 2026 of Gachibowli Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 69, 115, 351, 78, 303(2), 74, 63 read with 64 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 64 of IT Act 2000-2008.
- 2 - 2.
The brief facts of the case are that, on 19.05.2026, the de-facto complainant lodged a report with the police stating that she came into contact with the petitioner in June 2024. He represented himself as a businessman and promised to support her influencer career. Over time, he developed an emotional relationship with her and repeatedly assured her that he would marry her after obtaining a divorce from his wife, claiming that divorce proceedings were already pending. Despite his attempts to establish physical relations, she consistently refused, stating that she would not engage in any sexual relationship before marriage. On the petitioner's assurance of professional opportunities, she relocated from Shivamogga to Hyderabad on 08.07.2025. He arranged accommodation for her at a co-living facility in Gachibowli and signed as her guardian.
Thereafter, he allegedly began pressuring her for physical relations and, on 14.07.2025, forcibly committed sexual intercourse against her will despite her resistance. Subsequently, the petitioner continuously monitored her movements, physically assaulted and threatened and intimidated her from approaching the police or media. On 08.08.2025, when she attempted to inform his family members about his conduct, she was allegedly prevented from entering the residence and was slapped and abused by his father.
- 3 - her Instagram, Gmail, Apple ID and other digital accounts containing personal and sensitive information. She suspected the involvement of one Mr. Dileep Kumar Darapu, allegedly acting at the instance of the petitioner. Owing to fear of misuse of her private data, she claimed that she was compelled to compromise the matter. The petitioner continues to possess her personal data, photographs, videos, chats and other sensitive information, causing her fear and mental distress and also retaliated by lodging false complaints against her and circulating fabricated chats and allegations through media and social media platforms to defame and harass her. Consequently, the complainant requested the police to take necessary action, and based on her complaint, a case was registered for the alleged offences.
3.
Heard Sri T. Srikanth Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri S. Rama Mohan Rao, learned counsel on record for the petitioner, Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State and Sri Mohammad Fayaz, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the victim/de-facto complainant.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations levelled against him and
- 4 - has been falsely implicated in the present case and that the petitioner had earlier lodged a complaint against the de-facto complainant, which was registered as Crime No. 0112 of 2026 at Jayanagar Police Station, Bengaluru City, Karnataka State, and that the present case has been registered as a counterblast to the said complaint. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 21.05.2026 and that the crucial part of the investigation has already been completed. Therefore, he prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner.
5.
On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, contending that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and grave in nature and that the investigation is still at an initial stage. He further submitted that the police had filed a custody petition before the trial Court; however, the same was not numbered as the case was initially registered at Gachibowli Police Station and was subsequently transferred to Rajendranagar Police Station. As such, at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to the grant of bail and therefore prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
6.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de-facto complainant submitted that the de-facto complainant apprehends
- 5 - a threat from the petitioner and that he is in possession of her personal information and data available on social media platforms. He further submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every likelihood of his sharing such personal information on social media, thereby causing serious prejudice to the de-facto complainant. He also submitted that the investigation is at an initial stage and that the custody petition filed by the police is pending before the trial Court. Therefore, he prayed this Court to dismiss the present criminal petition.
7.
In light of the submissions made by the learned counsel and upon a perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 21.05.2026. As per the remand case diary, prosecution witnesses, namely LWs.1 to 10, including the Investigating Officer, have already been examined. It is also noted that the alleged incident is stated to have occurred in July, 2025, whereas the report came to be lodged on 19.05.2026. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the stage of investigation, the duration of incarceration and the progress made in the investigation, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner‐accused, subject to the following conditions:
- 6 - i.
The petitioner-accused shall execute a 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 II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-X Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy at Kukatpally Cyberabad.
ii.
The petitioner-accused shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday 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 shall not directly or indirectly influence, threaten, or induce the de-facto complainant any of the prosecution witnesses.
iv.
The petitioner-accused shall not hamper the investigation or tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.
v.
The petitioner/accused shall not share or inform anything about this case in media or social media in whatsoever manner.
vi.
The petitioner-accused shall not leave the country without prior permission of the
- 7 - concerned Court and surrender his passport before the Court concerned.
vii.
The petitioner-accused shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).
8.
Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 22.06.2026 SS
- 8 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.8435 OF 2026 DATE: 22.06.2026 SS