Sri Pasarlapudi Nagaraju v. The State Telangna
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9675 OF 2025 ORDER :
This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNSS') by the petitioners/A.11 and A.12 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.202 of 2025 of Sultanabad Police Station, Ramagundam. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 103 (1), 109(2), 61(2) r/w.190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS').
2.
The facts of the case are that on 15.07.2025, at about 11:00 hours, at the open plots beside Rajiv Rahadari on the outskirts of Chinnakalvala Village, Sulthanabad Mandal, the petitioners herein along with other accused allegedly conspired to kill the complainant's husband Mallesh, her father-in-law, and brother-inlaw due to ongoing disputes involving her in-laws, Motam Maraiah and his wife Laxmi. As part of their plan, the accused induced the complainant's family members to attend a panchayat before the village elders near the police station. Believing their words, the complainant's family attended the panchayat on the said date and
- 2 - time. During the discussion, at about 11:00 hours, A-11 and A-12 took knives, rods, and wooden bat from a car. A-2 allegedly held the complainant's husband Mallesh, while A-1 stabbed him on the left side of his chest and stomach, causing severe bleeding injuries. A-2 also stabbed her brother-in-law Madhunaiah on his back and stomach, while A-3 to A-7 attacked her father-in-law Saraiah on his head and legs, causing bleeding injuries. A-8 to A-10 allegedly attacked her brother-in-law Maraiah with a knife, causing scratch injuries on his stomach, and A-8 to A-10 beat her husband Mallesh with rods. Mallesh was immediately shifted to the Government Civil Hospital, Sulthanabad, where the doctor declared him brought dead due to stab injuries on his chest and stomach and her father-in-law Saraiah and brother-in-law Madhunaiah were shifted to Akhira Hospital, Karimnagar, and admitted for treatment. Basing on the complaint given, the police registered the case against the accused for the said offences. 3.
Heard Sri Y.V.Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that petitioners have nothing to do with the alleged offence. The
- 3 - petitioners herein are the brother-in-law and co-sister of the complainant. The allegations leveled against these petitioners are baseless and only on hearsay they have been implicated in this case. There are no specific overt acts attributed to these petitioners. He further contended that keeping grudge, the petitioners are dragged into this case only to harass them. Petitioner No.1 is the cab driver living in Hyderabad and petitioner No.2 is his wife and most of the investigation is also completed. As such, prayed this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5.
On the other hand learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed counter stating that the petitioners herein are also involved in the commission of offence. The petitioners herein are husband and wife and they have took out weapons i.e., iron rods, wooden bats and knife from the car and gave it to A.1 to kill the deceased. All the accused with a pre-plan quarreled with the complainant's family members, beat them with hands, chairs, iron rods, wooden bats steel hand stick due to which the complainant's father-in-law and brother-in-law received bleeding injuries and the husband of complainant died. If the petitioners are granted bail, they will not
- 4 - cooperate with the investigation. Hence, requested this Court to dismiss this petition.
6.
Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and the material on record, the allegations against these petitioners are that they aided A.1 by giving weapons to kill the deceased and admittedly, these petitioners are present at the scene of offence to attend panchayat. Except the allegation that these petitioners gave weapons to A.1, there are no other specific overt acts against them showing that these petitioners also attacked the deceased and injured. Considering the same, this Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioners/A.11 and A.12 subject to the following conditions:
i.
The petitioners/A.11 and A.12 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Sulthanabad Police Station, Ramagundam, within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release the petitioners on bail on their executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) each with two sureties, for the like sum each.
ii.
The petitioners/A.11 and A.12 shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Wednesday for a period of eight (8) weeks, for the purpose of investigation and thereafter, as and when required.
iii.
The petitioners/A.11 and A.12 shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) of
- 5 - BNSS and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.
7.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date :25.08.2025 Rds
- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9675 OF 2025 DATE : 25.08.2025 Rds