Abdul Sohail @ Gabbar, v. The State Of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13791 of 2025 ORDER:

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner-accused in Crime No.348 of 2025 of Falaknuma Police Station, Hyderabad, on bail, the present petition is filed.

2 .

The brief facts of the case are that, the de-facto complainant, lodged a report with the police stating that 25 days prior, a quarrel had taken place between his friend and the petitioner, during which the petitioner assaulted his friend and then left the scene. He further stated that on 01.09.2025, the petitioner came in front of his house to settle the earlier dispute. At that time, the complainant was standing outside his residence, and both parties mutually agreed to compromise the matter. However, while leaving, the petitioner initiated an argument with the complainant, questioning his interference in the issue and threatening him. During the altercation, the petitioner allegedly took out a knife from his waist and attempted to kill the complainant by attacking his neck. The complainant defended himself with his right hand, resulting in an injury to his right palm and requested the police to take necessary action. Based on the complaint, a case was

registered as Crime No.348 of 2025 for offences punishable under Section 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 25(1)(A) of the Arms Act.

3.

Heard Sri Mohd. Muzafferullah Khan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations leveled against him and had no intention to commit the alleged offence. The petitioner was arrested on 03.09.2025 and has remained in judicial custody since then. He further submitted that both parties have compromised the matter, and the same was reported before the Trial Court by the de-facto complainant himself and a substantial portion of the investigation has already been completed. Therefore, 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 heinous in nature and that the de-facto complainant sustained

a stab injury and that the investigation is still ongoing, with the charge sheet yet to be filed. Therefore, prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6.

In light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon a perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 03.09.2025. As reflected in the remand case diary, prosecution witnesses LWs.1 to 14 have already been examined. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, including the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, and the duration 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) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XVI 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) 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: 31.10.2025 SS

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13791 of 2025 Date: 31.10.2025 SS