Sri P. Subba Raju, v. The State Of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13666 of 2025 ORDER:

The present Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to grant pre arrest bail to the petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.5 in Crime No.68 of 2025 before the EOW Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) read with 61(2) of BNS and Section 5 of TSPDFEA. 2.

The brief facts of the case are that the complainant, Smt. Kavitha Dhannamaneni, lodged a complaint alleging that accused persons, including the petitioner and others, cheated her by inducing her to invest Rs.273.17 Crores in a fraudulent business scheme, "Shri Sai Ram Enterprises", using forged documents and fake purchase orders, and later threatened her with dire consequences when she demanded a refund, utilizing their influence, financial and muscle power to intimidate her. On receipt of the said

complainant, a case was registered against the accused persons for the offences as alleged.

3.

Heard Sri Niranjan Reddy, learned senior counsel appearing for Sri K.Pradeep Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner, and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent - State. 4.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent of the offences as alleged and is no way connected to the alleged offence. He further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case by the complainant, and that he has no involvement in the alleged offences of cheating, forgery, and criminal breach of trust. He contended that the petitioner himself is a victim of Smt. Sandhya Rani and her family members, having invested substantial amounts with them, and that he had introduced the complainant to them as a neighbor and community member, but had no role in the financial dealings. He asserted that the daughter of petitioner, Smt. Tejaswini, was a partner in M/s. Shri Sai Kripa Enterprises, and after she was bought out by the

complainant, the petitioner had no further involvement with the business. He averred that the petitioner was not even present at the residence of Accused No. 2 on the alleged date and pointed out that another FIR (No. 69 of 2025) lodged by a different complainant did not mention his name, further indicating his false implication. He highlighted the confessional statement of Smt. Sandhya Rani in FIR No. 104 of 2025, where she admitted to defrauding multiple individuals, including the petitioner. Therefore, he prayed this Court to grant anticipatory 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 petitioner stating that as per the averments of the complaint, huge fraud was committed, involving crores of rupees, and petitioner is instrumental in fabrication of documents. He contended that two other crimes are registered against the petitioner and that he is a habitual offender. Therefore, he prayed this Court to dismiss the criminal petition, stating that if the relief of anticipatory

bail is granted to petitioner, the investigation would be hampered.

6.

Having regard to rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that the allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other accused, had induced the complainant to invest huge amounts in the company created under the name and style of Shri Sai Ram Enterprises and committed fraud by fabrication of documents. However, on perusal of contents of complainant averments, it is noted that the petitioner acted as middlemen and with regard to the allegation that Rs.10 crores were transferred to the account of daughter of petitioner, it is noted that the same is already returned to complainant. That apart, it is seen that main allegations are leveled against accused Nos.1 and 2, who are already arrested and released on bail. Considering the facts of this case in entirety, this Court deems it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to petitioner, subject to compliance of the following conditions:

i.

The petitioner shall surrender before the Station House Officer, EOW Police Station, Cyberabad, within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release petitioner on bail, on his executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties, for the like sum each.

ii.

The petitioner shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.

iii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Investigating Officer on every Wednesday between 09:00 a.m, and 05:00 p.m., till the filing of the charge sheet and thereafter, as and when required.

7.

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 03.11.2025 PT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13666 of 2025 Date: 03.11.2025 PT