Devaraj Teju Pawar Alias Deva Alias Sachin v. The State Of Telangana,
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.15275 of 2025 DATE: 20.02.2026 Between:
Devaraj Teju Pawar @ Deva @ Sachin .... Petitioner/Accused No.3 AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad, Through PS Dundigal .... Respondent/Complainant
O R D E R
This Criminal Petition is filed before this Court for grant of bail to the Petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.3 in FIR No.423 of 2025 of Dundigal Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and he was remanded to the judicial custody on execution of PT Warrant on 11.09.2025.
- 2 - 2.
The case of the prosecution is that, on 23.04.2025, the defacto complainant on reliable information had conducted a raid and found accused Nos.1 and 2 in possession of 98.327 kgs of ganja and immediately reported the same to the concerned police authorities and thereafter, they investigated the same and the police registered a case for the above said offences. 3.
Heard Sri R. Prasanth, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially the petitioner was arrested on 22.08.2025 in FIR No.617 of 2025 and he was arrayed as accused No.1 in the said crime and by the time of registration of FIR No.617 of 2025, the present crime is pending before the same police station and the same is mentioned in the remand report of the FIR No.617 of 2025. It is further submitted that, even after the same, the petitioner herein is arrested and his arrest is not regularized in the present crime and there is no charge sheet filed within the mandatory period prescribed for grant of default bail and the petitioner herein is in jail since 22.08.2025. It is further submitted that, as on the date of remand in FIR No.617 of 2025, in the present crime also he is remanded to the judicial custody on 22.08.2025 and even in the
- 3 - present crime also, as on today, no charge sheet is filed, therefore, he is entitled for default bail and he is innocent of the said allegations and he is falsely implicated in the present case and on this ground, he is entailed for bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the order passed by this Court in Crl.Rc.No.849 of 2025. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to him 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, as on today, 180 days have not yet completed and the petitioner herein was arrested and his arrest was regularized in the present crime on execution of PT Warrant on 11.09.2025, therefore, the earlier period of remand cannot be construed for the purpose of calculating the statutory period in the present case. It is further submitted that, with respect to the date of remand in FIR No.617 of 2025, it is the duty of the petitioner herein to inform the Court that there is another case also pending against the petitioner herein and there is no such information conveyed by the petitioner, therefore, he is not entitled for the bail. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition. 6.
In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is
- 4 - evident that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 22.08.2025. He was remanded to the judicial custody in FIR No.617 of 2025 and while remanding the petitioner herein in FIR No.617 of 2025, they clearly mentioned about the present crime in the said remand report and even after the same, the arrest of the petitioner was not regularized in the present crime and the present crime was registered on 23.04.2025, and the period of remand is to be construed from 22.08.2025. As on today, 180 days have been completed, no custody petition has been filed, nor has any application seeking extension of time of remand has been filed and no charge sheet has been filed even according to the prosecution. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, 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), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge-CumAdditional Family Court, Medchal Malkajgiri District, at Malkajgiri.
- 5 - ii.
The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) weeks 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: 20.02.2026 TU
- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.15275 of 2025 DATE : 20.02.2026 TU