Rayala Durga Rao v. The State Of Telangana
THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.15946 OF 2025 18.12.2025 Between :
Rayala Durga Rao ...
Petitioner/A.3 And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings at Hyderabad Through the SHO, Bhadrachalam Town Police Station, BhadradriKothagudem District ... Respondent
ORDER
This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, by the petitioner/A.3 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.55 of 2025 of Bhadrachalam Town Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 318(4), 316(5), 336 (3) and 340(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS').
2.
The facts of the case are that de facto complainantKNVSK Chakravarthy, lodged a complaint stating that he is working as Branch Manager at LIC Bhadrachalam since 31.05.2024. On 01.08.2024, Ms. Bhukya Radha of Bhaskar Nagar, Sarapaka, intimated the death of her husband Sri Bhukya Sriramulu, having policy No. 658329689, LIC Anmol Jeevan II, claiming he had died on 21.06.2024 due to heart attack. The claim was processed through LIC agent Yakhoob Pasha of Reddypalem, with supporting documents including a death certificate issued by the Secretary, Kukunooru Mandal, and was certified by Sri BMM Swaroop as per LIC regulations. The claim was approved and Rs.10,00,000/- was paid to nominee Ms. Radha on 02.12.2024. However, on 06.02.2025, LIC agent G. Venkat Reddy informed that Sri Sriramulu was alive.
Chakravarthy and ABM Vallepu Venkanna visited Bhaskar Nagar, Sarapaka, and confirmed through Aadhaar and bank details that Sri Sriramulu was indeed alive. On questioning, Sri Sriramulu and Ms. Radha admitted that, along with Rayala Durga Rao, Bhukya Lakshma, and agent Yakhoob Pasha, they had fraudulently claimed the policy money with an intention of sharing it among themselves. Hence, basing on the complaint police registered the case against the accused for the above offences.
3.
Heard Sri T.Vasanth Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there are no specific overt acts against the petitioner except stating that the death certificate of Bhukya Sriramulu was planned by the petitioner along with other accused. Further no amount was transferred to the petitioner, as such inducing dishonestly by the petitioner does not arise. He further contended that there is no breach of trust as there is no entrustment of property, as such Section 316(5) of BNS does not attract to the petitioner herein. Further, there is no allegation of forging of any signature or document and there is no dishonest intention of using the forged document as such, Sections 336(3) and 340(2) are also not applicable to the petitioner. He further contended that A.1, A.2, A.4 and A.5 were arrested and they were also granted bail by the trial Court and investigation is almost completed except filing of charge sheet. Hence, prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner. 5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail stating that the offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. The petitioner along with other accused
claimed policy amount of a person who is alive claiming him as dead and fraudulently shared among themselves. Hence, petitioner is not entitled for bail and prayed to dismiss this petition. However, he informed the Court that no cases are pending against the petitioner.
6.
Considering the submissions made and a perusal of the material available on record, it is seen that the petitioner herein is A.3 and he is not the beneficiary and no amount was transferred to him. Further, most of the investigation is completed and the other accused in this case were already granted bail. Considering the same, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required in this case. Hence, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions :
i.
The petitioner/A.3 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Bhadrachalam Town Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem District within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release petitioner/A.3 on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, for the like sum each.
ii.
The petitioner/A.3 shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Wednesday for a period of eight (8) weeks,
for the purpose of investigation and thereafter, as and when required.
iii.
The petitioner/A.3shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482 (2) of BNSS and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.
7.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 18.12.2025 Rds
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.15946 OF 2025 Date: 18.12.2025 Rds