Shiva Nelluru, v. The State Of Telangana

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.15201, 15202 and 15203 of 2025 DATE: 03.12.2025 Crl.P.No.15201 of 2025 BETWEEN:

Chinta Ravindhar Reddy @ Chintha Ravinder Reddy .....petitioner/accused No.1 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its P.P. H.C of Telangana P.S., Toopran, Medak District and another .....Respondent/complainant Crl.P.No.15202 of 2025 BETWEEN:

Shiva Nelluru .....petitioner/accused No.6 And

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its P.P. H.C of Telangana P.S., Toopran, Medak District and another .....Respondent/complainant Crl.P.No.15203 of 2025 BETWEEN:

Chinta Jaipal Reddy @ Chintha Jaipal Reddy .....petitioner/accused No.3 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its P.P. H.C of Telangana P.S., Toopran, Medak District and another .....Respondent/complainant COMMON ORDER These Criminal Petitions are filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, who is arrayed as accused Nos.1, 3 and 6 in Crime No.351 of 2025 before the Toopram Police Station, Medak District, registered for the

offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 118(1), 115(2), 352 read with 3(5) of BNS.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that on 13.10.2025 the de facto complainant lodged a written complaint stating that he and his partners had purchased 12 acres of land in Survey Nos.88 and 90 of Brahmanpally village three years earlier and had taken possession by erecting precast walls. He alleged that on the same day at about 14:00 hours, while conducting a land survey, the accused persons, including Chinta Ravindhar Reddy and others, trespassed onto their land, claimed rights over 23 guntas in Survey No. 30, abused them, and assaulted them with hands and sticks, causing injuries. 3.

Heard Sri Gundaram 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 submitted that the petitioners, arrayed as accused No.1, 3, and 6 have been falsely implicated without any specific allegation or material linking them to the

alleged offences. He further submitted that the complaint did not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences against the petitioners and that they had been dragged into the case solely due to an existing village land dispute. He contended that the petitioners were the farmers. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner by allowing these Criminal Petitions.

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 serious in nature. Further, the investigation was not yet completed. At this stage, granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner does not arise. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss these criminal petitions.

6.

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the offences initially registered were under Section 181 of the BNSS and were later altered to Section 182 of the BNSS based on the medical evidence. It is further seen that petitioner/accused No.1 is

involved in as many as fourteen previous criminal cases. In view of the said criminal antecedents, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to petitioner/accused No.1 and the Criminal Petition, insofar as he is concerned, is liable to be dismissed.

7.

Insofar as petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 6 are concerned, there is no material placed on record to show any previous criminal history and the material part of the investigation has already been completed. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 6 are entitled to be enlarged on pre-arrest bail, subject to the following conditions:

i.

The petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 6 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Toopram Police Station, Medak District, within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release them on bail on executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/-, each with two sureties, for the like sum each.

ii.

The petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 6 shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.

iii.

The petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 6 shall appear before the concerned Investigating Officer on every Monday between 09:00 a.m, and 05:00 p.m., till the filing of the charge sheet and thereafter, as and when required 8.

Accordingly, Crl.P.No.15201 of 2025 filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 is dismissed and Crl.P.Nos.15202 and 15203 filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 6 are allowed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 03.12.2025 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.15201, 15202 and 15203 of 2025 Date: 03.12.2025 SAI