Padala Sudhakar, v. The State Of Telangana,
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.14634 & 14635 of 2025 COMMON ORDER:
These Criminal Petitions are filed before this Court for grant of regular bail to the petitioners who are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2, respectively, in connection with FIR.No.1510 of 2025 before the Pet Basheerabad Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103 and 109 read with 3(5) of BNS.
2.
The brief facts of the case according to prosecution are that petitioners attacked the deceased and injured one Ali with iron rods at a fabrication shed. Over the alleged involvement of petitioners in the said act, they were arrayed as accused and were arrested on 20.09.2025.
3.
Heard Sri P.Vikasraj, learned counsel for petitioner, and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent - State.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the incident in question was not premeditated but arose out of a sudden and grave provocation caused by the unlawful aggression of the deceased, Srikanth Goud, who along with his associates Ali, Raju, and Srinivas, forcibly entered the petitioners' business premises, abused them in filthy language, demanded Rs.10,00,000/- under threat of landgrabbing, and attempted to assault A1 by dragging him into a container. He asserted that the CCTV footage and seizure of rods and bloodstains from within the shed corroborate the petitioners' version and disprove any pre-planned aggression. He contended that the deceased had a history of criminal intimidation, extortion, and obstruction of road access to lawfully purchased plots, despite receiving Rs.1 crore from the purchasers including A1 and A2.
He lamented that the acts of complainant relating to continued harassment, threats, and use of machinery to damage public access roads led to nearly 30 to 40 police complaints, which were ignored due to his influence.
self-defence. The rods used were picked up in the heat of the moment, indicating no prior motive or conspiracy. Therefore, prayed this Court to grant the relief of bail to petitioners by allowing these criminal petitions.
5.
On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, vehemently, opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioners, and submitted that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are of serious nature and the investigation in the case is still under progress. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss these criminal petitions.
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 18.09.2025. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation was completed and L.Ws.1 to 17 were examined. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the incarceration period of the petitioners, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:
i.
The petitioners 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 IX Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal.
ii.
The petitioners 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 petitioners shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.(presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).
7.
Accordingly, these Criminal Petitions are allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 21.11.2025 SAI
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.14634 & 14635 of 2025 Date: 21.11.2025 SAI