A-1 Anil 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.9184 of 2026 DATE: 29.06.2026 Between:
Anil .... Petitioner/Accused No.1 AND The State of Telangana, Through SHO, P.S. Vanasthalipuram, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.
.... Respondent/Complainant : ORDER :
This criminal petition is filed under Sections 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by the petitioneraccused No.1 praying to enlarge him on bail in connection with Crime No.863 of 2026 of Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Malkajgiri District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 137(2), 65(1), 74, 75 and 351(2) of BNS and Sections 3 read with 4 and 7 read with 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
2.
The brief facts of the case are that on 07.05.2026, the de-facto complainant, who is the father of the victim, lodged a report before police stating that his daughter had left the house without informing any family members when no one else was present at home. Upon returning home, he found that his daughter was missing. He searched for her in the surrounding areas and at the houses of relatives, but his efforts went vain. Hence, he requested the police to take necessary action. Based on the said complaint, the police initially registered a case for the offence punishable under Section 137(2) of the BNS. During the course of the investigation, the statement of the victim was recorded. According to her statement, she had left the house due to the misbehavior of her brother and had gone with the petitioner herein with the intention of marrying him.
Consequently, the Section of law was altered to the abovementioned offences. 3.
Heard Sri P. Manoj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations levelled against him and
in fact, there are no specific allegations attracting the offences alleged against the petitioner. He submitted that both the petitioner and the victim had gone together with the intention of marrying each other and that the victim had voluntarily accompanied the petitioner only because of the misbehavior of accused No.2. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 15.05.2026 and that the material part of the investigation has already been substantially completed. Hence, he prayed this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail by allowing this criminal petition.
5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail, contending that the offences alleged against the petitioner are grave and serious in nature and that the investigation has not yet been completed and that although the prosecution has filed an application for recording the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS, the said application has not yet been taken up. Therefore, he contended that at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. Hence, he prayed this Court to dismiss the present petition. 6.
Having considered the rival submissions and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the
petitioner has been in judicial custody since 15.05.2026. The allegations disclose that the petitioner and the victim had gone together with the intention of marrying each other. The statement of the victim further reveals that she left her house due to the misbehavior of accused No.2. As per the remand case diary, prosecution witnesses, namely LWs. 1 to 14, have already been examined. Though the prosecution submits that the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS is yet to be recorded, the petitioner has remained in custody for a considerable period and the substantial part of the investigation has already been completed. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the progress of the investigation and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: i.
The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned VII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Hayathnagar.
ii.
The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO 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 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 483(2) of the BNSS.
7.
Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 29.06.2026 SS
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9184 of 2026 Date: 29.06.2026 SS