Satyaranjan Pahda, v. State Of Telangana,
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9005 of 2026 DATE: 24.06.2026 Between:
Satyaranjan Parida .... Petitioner/Accused AND State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad.
.... Respondent
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.117 of 2026 of Habeebnagar Police Station, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 69, 78, 77, 308(2), 351 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 66E and 67 of I.T. Act.
- 2 - 2.
The brief facts of the case are that, on 29.04.2026, the de-facto complainant lodged a report with the police stating that she became acquainted with the accused while both were working at a cafe. The accused allegedly induced her into a physical relationship on the false promise of securing a better job and is stated to have had sexual relations with her on multiple occasions. It is further alleged that the accused secretly recorded her private photographs and videos and thereafter, threatened to circulate the same among her family members, relatives, and colleagues. The accused is also alleged to have disseminated such intimate content through social media platforms and demanded an amount of Rs.40,000/- from complainant for deleting photographs and videos, threatening to continue circulating them if the demand was not met. Based on the said complaint, a case was registered against the petitioner for the abovementioned offences.
3.
Heard Sri Mohammed Adnan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondentState.
- 3 - 4.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations and has been falsely implicated in the case and that the relationship between the petitioner and the de‐facto complainant was consensual in nature, therefore, the offence alleged under Section 69 of the BNS is not attracted and that no photographs or videos, as alleged by the prosecution, were recorded by the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 04.05.2026 and that the crucial part of the investigation has already been completed. Hence, 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 grievous in nature. He further submitted that on the false promise of securing employment, the petitioner physically and sexually exploited the victim and thereafter blackmailed her by threatening to circulate her intimate photographs and videos among her family members and others and that the investigation is still
- 4 - in progress. Therefore, prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal 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 04.05.2026. As per the remand case diary, prosecution witnesses LWs.1 to 13, including the investigating officer, have already been examined. 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-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 learned XVI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Hyderabad.
ii.
The petitioner-accused shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of
- 5 - 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 de-facto complainant or any of the prosecution witnesses.
iv.
The petitioner-accused shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).
v.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the prosecution or the victim/de-facto complainant is at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.
7.
Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 24.06.2026 SS
- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9005 OF 2026 DATE: 24.06.2026 SS