Mohammad Sumar Baba, v. The State Of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13537 of 2024 ORDER:

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.37 of 2024 of Musheerabad Police Station, Hyderabad, on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that on 25.01.2024, respondent No.2 lodged a complaint against the petitioner, who allegedly cheated and assaulted her. The petitioner met through a mutual friend in the month September 2021, and he proposed love, which she accepted. He made false marriage promises, engaging in sexual relations multiple times at OYO rooms in Hyderabad, and borrowed Rs.2 lakhs and gold ornaments from her. When she questioned him about marriage, he cited financial issues and claimed his family would not accept her due to her Scheduled Caste background, using derogatory caste-based slurs. After discovering his true intentions, respondent No.2 confronted the petitioner, leading to physical assaults, theft of her

phone and belongings, and further harassment from his associates, Akhila Naidu and Safoora Malika.

Neha attempted suicide on 21.01.2024, and after hospitalization, Sumar Baba returned her gold ornaments.

3.

Heard Sri K. Venkataramanaiah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri Syed Yasar Manoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State. Though notice served upon respondent No.2, none appeared on her behalf.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in fact both the petitioner and respondent No.2 are majors and had consensual sex for which reason the petitioner cannot be targeted and a criminal case be filed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail 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 stating that the offence committed by the petitioner is heinous in nature, therefore, granting of

bail does not arise. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6.

After considering submissions from both the learned counsel and reviewing the record, the three years relationship between the petitioner and respondent No. 2, and the basis of the complaint being the refusal of the petitioner to marry respondent No.2, and further, the petitioner is in jail from 28.09.2024 and the record shows that material witnesses were already examined. Therefore, 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.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XVII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hyderabad.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday 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 437(3) of Cr.P.C.

7.

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

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 12.11.2024 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13537 of 2024 Date: 12.11.2024 SAI