Ajit Ashok Karhale, v. The State Of Telangana Through S.H.O. P.S. Charminar, Hyderabad,
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9170 OF 2026 DATE : 23.06.2026 Between :
Mr.Ajit Ashok Karhale.
...Petitioner/
Accused No.1 And The State of Telangana, Rep.byt its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State, Hyderabad.
Rep. Station House Officer, Charminar PS.
... Respondent Complainant
O R D E R
This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioner/Accused No.1 seeking to enlarge him on bail in connection with Crime No.82 of 2026 of Charminar Police Station, Charminar Division, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 69 and 318 (4), 351 (2) of the BNS Act.
2.
The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant lodged a report before police on 14.05.2026 stating that she acquainted with the petitioner in the year 2024 through online and the petitioner established physical relationship with her by assuring and inducing her with promises of marriage. It is further stated that thereafter, in June, 2024, the complainant came to know about the marital status of the petitioner and falsely assured her that he would obtain divorce from his wife and continued the physical relationship with her and induced her to transfer amounts for his business and personal requirements.
The complainant transferred amount multiple times, but the same was not returned to her. When she insisted for marriage, he refused to marry her. Hence, she requested the police to take necessary action against the complaint. Basing on the same, police registered a case against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences.
3.
Heard Mr. Amol Shobha Shivaji Ghuge, learned counsel representing Mohammed Zakiuddin, learned counsel for the petitioner/Accused No.1 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 the petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against him; that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 14.05.2026; that the relationship between the petitioner and the complainant is a consensual one; that the petitioner was not produced before the Maharashtra Court and he was produced before Nampally Court and remanded to judicial custody that both the petitioner and the complainant are majors; that even the complainant came to know the petitioner from the year 2024 she had transferred amounts whenever the petitioner is in need that the complainant falsely implicated the petitioner in this case and hence, he prays this Court to grant bail to the petitioner.
5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the same and submits that the offences alleged against the petitioner are heinous and grievous in nature; that under the promise of marriage, the petitioner herein exploited the petitioner on many occasions and thereafter the petitioner refused to marry
her; that the investigation is not yet completed and hence, he prays this Court to dismiss the petition.
6.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 14.05.2026. As seen from the allegations in the report filed by the victim the relationship between the petitioner and the victim is a consensual one from 2024 to 2026. The victim also knows the marital status of the petitioner and thereafter also their relationship continued. Considering the allegation against the petitioner, progress in investigation L.Ws.1 to 6 were examined and also the period of incarceration, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner/Accused No.1 subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner-accused No.1 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 Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.
(ii) On such release, the petitioner-accused No.1 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 petitioner-accused No.1 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480 (3) of BNSS). 7.
Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 23.06.2026 YVL