Budamagunta Sriram Shesh Prem Sundeep 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.9011 of 2026 DATE: 24.06.2026 Between:

Budamagunta Sriram Shesh Prem Sundeep

...Petitioner/accused

AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/Complainant

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition is filed before this Court for grant of bail to the Petitioner who is arrayed as accused in FIR No.21 of 2026 of Narayanguda Police Station, Hyderabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 351(2) of the BNS 2023.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, on 20.01.2026, the de-facto complainant lodged a report before the police stating that the petitioner herein had committed sexual assault on her multiple times against her consent and will in Grand

- 2 - hotel, Himayatnagar, Hyderabad on 23.7.2025 & 25.7.2025 and threatened her with dire consequences if she reveal the fact to anybody he will circulate her photographs in social media and other platforms. Due to which out of fear and apprehending danger to her personal safety she could not reveal the facts even to her family members as well as to any authorities about the atrocities of the petitioner and later, the petitioner herein performed marriage with the de-facto complainant. Hence, the complainant requested to take necessary action. Basing on the said complaint, the police registered a case for the above said offences. 3.

Heard Sri K. S. S. Sanjay, learned counsel representing Sri Raghu Gurram, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondentState. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the said allegations and he is falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that on 23.07.2025 and 25.07.2025 both the petitioner and the defacto complainant went to shopping and there is no such

- 3 - assault committed by the petitioner and the petitioner also performed marriage with the victim and they happily lived for two months and again the de-facto complainant lodged a false complaint against the petitioner under Section 498-A and Sections 3 and 4 of DP Act in the Month of March, 2026, wherein the parents of the accused went to the police station and they received notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS. He further submitted that the present complaint is nothing but a false complaint and he is in jail since 30.04.2026 and the material part of the investigation was already completed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to him by allowing this criminal petition.

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 heinous in nature. He submitted that, although the marriage was performed, the same cannot be considered a ground for granting bail, as the petitioner had physically exploited the de-facto complainant. Further, the investigation is not yet completed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

- 4 - 6.

In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner herein is in jail since 30.04.2026 and as seen from the record, the offence took place on 25.07.2025, whereas the complaint was filed on 20.01.2026 i.e. after the marriage between the parties on 08.10.2025. As seen from the remand case diary, the prosecution witnesses, LWs 1 to 21 have already been examined. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court finds it appropriate 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), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned X Additional Session 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) weeks

- 5 - 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: 24.06.2026 TU

- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9011 OF 2026 DATE 24.06.2026 TU