Sri Battula Nivas, 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.15776 of 2025 DATE: 10.12.2025 Between:
Sri Battula Nivas .... Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad and another .... Respondent/Complainant
O R D E R
This criminal petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioner/Accused seeking his enlargement on bail in connection with Crime No.395 of 2025 of Miyapur Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 69 and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 3(2)(v) of SCs & STs (POA) Act.
2.
The brief facts of the case are that, on 19.03.2025, the de-facto complainant lodged a report with the police stating that she and the petitioner had been in a relationship for the past two and a half years, during which they lived together in an apartment for one and a half years. She alleged that under the promise of marriage, the petitioner exploited her physically and also took an amount of Rs.4,60,000/- from her. Subsequently, the petitioner refused to marry her on the ground that she belongs to the Scheduled Caste (SC) community. Consequently, she approached the police seeking necessary action, and based on her complaint, a case was registered against the petitioner for the aforementioned offences.
3.
Heard Sri Ponnam Ashok Goud, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations and has been falsely implicated in the case and that the relationship between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant was consensual, and therefore, the offences alleged are not applicable to the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 25.11.2025 and that the crucial part of the
investigation has already been completed. Hence, prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner.
5.
On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, contending that the allegations against the petitioner are grave in nature and the investigation is still ongoing. 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 25.11.2025. As per the remand case diary, prosecution witnesses LWs.1 to 12, including the investigating authority, have already been examined. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the stage of investigation, the relationship between the parties and the duration of incarceration, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner-accused, subject to the following conditions: i.
The petitioner-accused 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 VIII Additional
Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at Kukatpally.
ii.
The petitioner-accused 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-accused 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 petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 10.12.2025 SS
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.15776 OF 2025 DATE: 10.12.2025 SS