Godampally Sidarth @ Chintu v. The State Of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11801 of 2025 ORDER:

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner-accused No.2 in S.C.No.396 of 2023 on the file of the learned IX Additional District and Sessions Judge at Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar, on bail, the present petition is filed.

2 .

Heard Sri Dunna Ambedkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Sri Arun Kumar Doddla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 394 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and that the petitioner was absent during one of the adjournments, pursuant to which the learned Sessions Judge issued a NonBailable Warrant (NBW) against the petitioner on 07.03.2025 and the Court permitted the issuance of a PT warrant and at that time, the petitioner was in judicial custody in connection with another case, which also involved execution of a warrant. However, the jail

authorities failed to produce the petitioner before the trial Court. He further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is limited to the issuance and execution of the NBW during the course of trial. The petitioner got bail in S.C.No.503 of 2023 vide Crl.P.No.2985 of 2025 by this Court and that on the date of issuance of the NBW, the petitioner was not produced by the jail authorities, and therefore, there was no negligence, willful default, or wanton intention on the part of the petitioner. Therefore, prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

4.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner was not produced before the concerned trial Court on the relevant date and prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition. 5.

In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is noted that the petitioner was in judicial custody in another case at the relevant time and was not produced before the trial Court due to administrative reasons. Considering the circumstances and the stage of proceedings, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

i.

The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned IX Additional District and Sessions Judge at Ranga Reddy at L.B. Nagar.

ii.

The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.

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

6.

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

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 24.09.2025 SS

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11801 of 2025 Date: 24.09.2025 SS