Godithala Mahesh v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10513 OF 2025 ORDER:

This criminal petition is filed by the petitioneraccused seeking regular bail in connection with Cr.No.110 of 2025 of Gurrampode Police Station, Nalgonda District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 64(2) (f), 103(1), 122 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNS').

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant, lodged a report before the police on 30.06.2025 stating that in the evening of 29.06.2025, his wife started from Miryalaguda to go to their village, Junthala. At around 20:30 hours, his wife stopped from the bus at Mallepally bus stand. Later, she called him and informed him that, as there was no bus available at that time, she was going to their village in the car of their villager Mahesh, who works as an RMP doctor. Later that night, around 21:00 hours, he called his wife again, but

her mobile was switched off. He continued trying to call her, but the phone remained switched off. Later that night, at around 02:00 hours, his relatives informed him that his wife had consumed pesticide and was admitted to the Government Hospital in Devarakonda. Immediately, the complainant, along with his younger brother Mankena Rajashekar Reddy and Kancharla Jan Reddy, rushed to Devarakonda Hospital. On the advice of the duty medical doctor, his wife was shifted to Osmania Hospital, Hyderabad, for better treatment. In the morning hours of 30.06.2025, his wife's younger sister Santamma and her husband Venkat Reddy reached the hospital and asked the his wife what had happened to her. In response, his wife revealed that the accused had given her some tablets, told her to take them and stated that the tablets were used for strength, given two injections in both her hands, and then committed rape. Later, the said person mixed pesticide in water and forcibly made her consume it. "She gave this statement in the presence of doctors". While undergoing

treatment, his wife died. Based on the complaint, the police registered a case against the petitioner.

3.

Heard Sri Sanjeeva Reddy Garlapati, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Arun Kumar Doddla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondentState. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences. The contents of the FIR and the subsequent statement, which appears to be exaggerated and largely related to the alleged dying declaration, are doubtful in terms of its authenticity and admissibility. The petitioner himself shifted the deceased to the hospital. Even according to the police, the material part of the investigation has already been completed, and the petitioner has been in jail since 03.07.2025. Despite this, no charge sheet has been filed for more than 60 days. Therefore, he requested that the Court grant bail. 5.

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail and contended that the

allegation against the petitioner is heinous and grievous, as it is a rape-cum-murder case, and the investigation is still at the initial stage. At this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to bail and prayed for dismissal of the petition. 6.

Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and the material placed on record, the offence against the petitioner is grievous and heinous, whereas the petitioner has been in jail since 03.07.2025. As seen from the record, LWs.1 to 13 have already been examined by the investigating authority, this Court deems it appropriate 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), each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nalgonda.

ii.

The petitioner 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 petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 480(3) of the BNSS, earlier known as Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.

7.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date :09.09.2025 fm

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10513 OF 2025 DATE : 09.09.2025 fm