Orse Raju v. The State Of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11100 of 2025 ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed before this Court to enlarge the petitioner-accused No.2 on bail in Crime No.368 of 2025 of Suraram Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 49 read with 3(5) of BNS.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that, on 06.07.2025, the defacto lodged a report with the Police stating that on 05.07.2025, his younger brother Ahmad was found lying on the road in a drunken state in front of his rented house. At that time, three local residents from the neighbouring street in Pandu Basti by name, David, Santosh, and Jahangeer noticed Ahmad lying on the road. They carried him into his room and laid him on his bed. After some time, they noticed that Ahmad was bleeding. They immediately called the 108 ambulance service and informed the house owner. As soon as the ambulance arrived, Ahmad was shifted to Gandhi Hospital in Secunderabad for treatment. Later, it was informed that while undergoing treatment at Gandhi Hospital, Ahmad passed away in the early hours of 06.07.2025, as

such requested for necessary legal action. As per the remand report, A1 and A2 arrived at the deceased's residence on A2's bike. The deceased was asleep inside. A2 knocked on the door, woke him, and brought him outside. Around 23:30 hours, during a conversation, the deceased allegedly abused A1 and his family, leading to a quarrel. In a fit of anger, A1 slapped the deceased and then picked up a wooden stick lying nearby. He struck the deceased forcefully on the back of the head two or three times. The deceased collapsed and became unresponsive. After confirming his death, both accused fled the scene separately. 3.

Heard Sri G.L. Narasimha Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Sri E. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offences. Even as per the case of the prosecution, no specific role has been attributed to the petitioner except that he accompanied Accused No.1 and knocked on the door of the deceased. He further submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 09.07.2025, and a substantial portion of the investigation has already been completed and that none of the alleged offences are directly or specifically attributable to the petitioner, and there are no substantive

allegations against him. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition. 5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, contending that the allegations against the petitioner are grave in nature, involving an offence under Section 103 (murder). He further submitted that although the petitioner may not have played a direct role, he was involved in the incident, and considering the seriousness of the charges and the fact that the investigation is still ongoing, releasing the petitioner on bail at this stage may lead to tampering with evidence or intimidation of witnesses and prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition. 6.

In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 09.07.2025. As seen from the record, the petitioner is alleged to have aided Accused No.1, and the offence attributed to him is punishable under Section 49 read with Section 3(5) of BNS. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, including the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, and the period of incarceration, this Court finds 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), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned VIII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal, Cyberabad.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 A.M., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) week 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 437(3) of Cr.P.C.

(presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

7.

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 11.09.2025 SS

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11100 of 2025 Date: 11.09.2025 SS