Thammareddy Shashank Reddy@Siddu v. State Of Telangana,
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9155 OF 2026 DATE : 02.07.2026 Between :
Thammareddy Shashank Reddy ...
Petitioner/A.1 And The State of Telangana ...
Respondent/Complainant : ORDER :
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by the petitioner praying this Court to enlarge him on bail who is accused No.1 in FIR No.365 of of Chaitanyapuri Police Station, Rachakonda. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 376(2)(n), 363 r/w.109 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 5(1) r/w.6 of POCSO Act.
- 2 - 2.
The brief facts of the case are that, on 01.07.2021, the mother of the victim girl lodged a complaint stating that her daughter, who had slept beside her on the previous night, was found missing at about 12:00 midnight. Despite searching for her at the houses of relatives and neighbours, the victim could not be traced. The complainant suspected one Siddu, a resident of the same street, of having taken away her daughter. Based on the complaint, the police registered the case against the accused for the above offences.
3.
Heard Sri Mahesh Muddala, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He contended that petitioner could not attend the Court proceedings on certain hearing dates due to serious health issues and injuries sustained in an accident, which resulted in the issuance of a non-bailable warrant. His absence was neither deliberate nor intended to evade the process of law. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner was unaware of the subsequent hearing dates and now undertakes
- 3 - to appear before the trial Court on every hearing date and cooperate with the proceedings. He further contended that the petitioner's wife and minor child are suffering from serious health issues and are in urgent need of his care and support, and that his continued detention has caused severe hardship to the family. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 22.05.2026, the investigation has been completed, the case is posted for consideration of charges, and his further custodial detention is no longer necessary. He further submitted that the petitioner shall abide by any conditions imposed by this Court, and cooperate with the trial. Hence, prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner.
5.
On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application, contending that due to non-appearance of petitioner the trial was stalled. If petitioner is granted bail, he may abscond which may cause delay in trial proceedings. As such, petitioner is not entitled to bail and prayed to dismiss this petition.
6.
Having considered the rival submissions and the material available on record, this Court observes that the petitioner has
- 4 - been in judicial custody since 22.05.2026, the investigation has been completed, and the case is posted for consideration of charges. The petitioner has explained that his earlier nonappearance before the trial Court was due to health issues. The apprehension expressed by the prosecution that the petitioner may abscond or delay the trial can be adequately safeguarded by imposing appropriate conditions while granting bail. Hence, this Court is inclined 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 Fast Track Special Judge for Trail and Disposal of RAPE and POCSO Act Cases, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar.
ii. The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date of adjournment without fail until the conclusion of trial.
iii. The petitioner shall not file any application seeking dispensation of his personal appearance before the trial Court on any date of hearing.
- 5 - iv. The petitioner shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall not, directly or indirectly, influence or threaten the witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence.
v. In the event of violation of any of the above conditions, it is open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner in accordance with law.
7.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date :02.07.2026 Rds
- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9155 OF 2026 DATE : 02.07.2026 Rds