Mohammad Arbas, v. The State Of Telangana, P.S. Banjara Hills, Hyderabad,

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.8750 of 2026 DATE: 22.06.2026 BETWEEN:

Mohammad Arbas.

..... Petitioner/accused And The State of Telangana P.S. Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, 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.288 of 2026 of Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 69, 351(2) of BNS.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that on 06.04.2026, the victim girl lodged a report before the police stating that she had been in a relationship with the petitioner, since August

2025. According to her, the accused had promised to marry her and believing his assurance, she continued the relationship and entered into a physical relationship. Subsequently, the victim came to know that the accused was already engaged to another woman and that his marriage had been fixed with her. When questioned, the accused allegedly admitted that he had misled the victim and refused to marry her. Thereafter, despite the intervention of elders and his temporary agreement to marry the victim, he again refused to do so at Santosh Nagar Mosque and fled from the spot. It is further alleged that he switched off his mobile phone and absconded. Thus, it is alleged that the petitioner cheated and exploited the victim by inducing her into a physical relationship on the false promise of marriage and thereafter refused to fulfill his promise. As such, requested the police to take necessary action against him. Basing on the report, the police registered a case against the accused for the abovementioned offences.

3.

Heard Sri Mohammed Azheruddin, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar,

learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State 4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations levelled against him and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the relationship between the victim girl and the petitioner is a consensual in nature. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 18.04.2026 and the investigation is almost completed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition. 5.

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail, submitting that the allegations against the petitioner is serious in nature and that the investigation is not yet completed, under the false promise of married he exploited the victim and entered into physical relationship and that he agreed to marry her and he later escaped. Hence, prayed to dismiss this petition. 6.

In light of the submissions made by both 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 18.04.2026. As per the remand case diary, prosecution witnesses LWs.1 to 9, including the investigating authority, have already been examined and charge sheet is also filed. The maximum punishment prescribed under Section 69 is ten years' imprisonment. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the stage of investigation, the relationship between the parties and the duration of incarceration, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner ‐ accused, 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 learned III Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderbad.

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: 22.06.2026 FM

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.8750 of 2026 Date: 22.06.2026 FM