Chinta Rahul, v. The State Of Telangana
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.9171, 9173 & 9384 OF 2026 DATE : 30.06.2026 Between in Crl.P.No.9171 of 2026:
Chinta Rahul S/o.Late Chinta Satyanarayana.
...Petitioner/
Accused No.1 And The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor for Home High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and another.
... Respondent Complainant Between in Crl.P.No.9173 of 2026:
Karla Sai Kumar @ Sai S/o.Karunakar Reddy and another
...Petitioners/
Accused Nos.2 and 3 And The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor for Home High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and another.
... Respondent Complainant Between in Crl.P.No.9384 of 2026:
Dasari Sunny S/o. Dasari Punnaiah.
...Petitioner/
Accused No.4
And The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor for Home High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and another.
... Respondent Complainant COMMON ORDER These three Criminal Petition are filed under Sections 480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 respectively seeking to enlarge them on bail in connection with Crime No.516 of 2026 on the file of Dundigal Police Station, Medchal Division of Cyberabad. The offence alleged against the petitioners is punishable under Section 109 read with 3 (5) of the BNS Act. 2.
The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant lodged a report before police on 22.05.2026, wherein it is stated that on 21.05.2026 at about 23:30 hours after closing the shop as usual, the complainant and his friend Ajay went to Road No.10, Balaji Colony to drop Ajay at his room and at about 00:00 hours, after dropping Ajay, both of them were chatting with each other, at that time A.1 to A.6 unnecessarily abused them in filthy
language and created nuisance. When they questioned them, said persons, who were in an intoxication condition, attacked Ajay with stones, and thereafter, the complainant went to Ajay's room and brought one Pavan in which A.1 to A.6 beat him and attacked Ajay and Pavan with knives and in the said accident, the complainant received bleeding injuries on both hands. Ajay escaped from the scene, went into the room and locked. However, the accused persons forcibly opened the door, broke the window glass, and attacked Ajay with a knife, due to which he sustained bleeding injuries and thereafter they escaped and admitted in Bhaskar Hospital, Gandimaisamma and later shifted to Yashoda Hospital, Secunderabad for better treatment. Thus A.1 to A.6 are punishable for the aforesaid offence. Hence, the complaint.
3.
Heard Sri Bonthu Lokesh Phanindra Reddy and M.Keshav Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners/A.1 to A.4 and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondents.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent of the offence alleged against them; that in fact there is no such intention
on the part of the victims to commit such offence and there is no prior intention to kill the victims; that as the complainant himself says that there is no prior acquaintance between the parties and it is a sudden quarrel and they are in intoxication condition and therefore, requested this Court to grant regular bail to the petitioners as they are judicial custody since 23.05.2026. 5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the offence alleged against the petitioners are grievous in nature as the victims sustained grievous injuries and they were shifted to Bhaskar Hospital and from there to Yashoda Hospital, Secunderabad for better treatment; that investigation is not yet completed, at this stage, the petitioners are not entitled for grant of bail and hence, he prays to dismiss the petitions.
6.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 23.05.2026. As seen from the record L.Ws.1 to 8 were examined. Considering the nature of allegations and period of incarceration and progress in investigation, this
Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 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 VIII Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal.
(ii) On such release, the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 4 shall appear before the concerned S.H.O. between 09:00 a.m., and 5:00 p.m., on every Wednesday 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 petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 4 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480 (3) of BNSS). 7.
Accordingly, these Criminal petitions are allowed.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 30.06.2026 YVL