Vemula Ravider, v. The State Of Telangana
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.14298 of2025 ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner, on bail, who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.168 of 2025 of Gummadidala Police Station, Sangareddy District.
2.
The brief facts of the case are that on 14.10.2025, the mother of the victim, lodged a complaint at Gummadidala Police Station alleging that on 13.10.2025, while her daughter was at school, an outsourced teacher by name Ravi had allegedly taken the child close to him, pinched her waist and thighs, and warned her not to disclose the incident to anyone. Basing on the said complaint, a case was registered in Crime No.168 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 74 of the BNS and Section 9(f) read with 10 of the POCSO Act.
3.
Heard Sri G. Manoj Goud, learned counsel appearing on behalf of 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 was falsely implicated in the case without any specific allegations or supporting evidence and that the police had not followed proper procedure to determine the age of the victim and that the Aadhaar card could not be treated as proof of age. He further submitted that the entire story was fabricated only to harass the petitioner, who is a respectable person with no criminal antecedents. He contended that the investigation had been completed, and further detention was unnecessary. 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 stating that the allegations leveled against the petitioner are heinous in nature. He further submitted that the petitioner being the teacher, he misbehaved with the student. Though the petitioner is an outsourcing employee is not a ground to grant bail to the petitioner. Further, the investigation was not yet completed. At this stage, granting of bail to the petitioner does not arise. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
6.
In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner is in jail since 15.10.2025. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed and L.Ws.1 to 11 witnesses have been examined.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the incarceration period of the petitioner, 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) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy District.
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: 14.11.2025 SAI
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.14298 of 2025 Date: 14.11.2025 SAI