Al. Mohammed Arbaz Uddin v. State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.16362 of 2025 DATE: 17.12.2025 BETWEEN:

Mohameed Arbaz Uddin and 2 others ..... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 And State of Telangana, Through PS Bandlaguda, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

..... Respondent/complainant

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.384 of 2025 before the Bandlaguda, Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 122, 308 and 351 read with 3(5) of BNS.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the de‐facto complainant lodged a private complaint before the Court, which was subsequently referred to the police for investigation. According to the complainant, who is the mother of the victim, accused No.1 deceitfully induced and trapped her daughter through social media, gained her confidence, and took her away from her lawful guardianship without consent. Accused Nos.2 and 3, the parents of accused No.1, knowingly colluded with their son in performing an illegal marriage ceremony with her minor daughter on 13‐06‐2025. This so‐called marriage was conducted without verifying age, consent, or lawful authority, and was registered by the Telangana Waqf Board. Following the marriage, accused Nos.

1 to 3 began demanding dowry in the form of cash and gold ornaments, and upon refusal, subjected the victim to mental and physical cruelty, intimidation, and threats. Furthermore, accused No.1, along with his parents, continuously demanded an amount of Rs.2,00,00,000/‐.

3.

Heard Sri Mahesh Muddala, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case. He contended that accused No.1 and the daughter of the de‐facto complainant are living together, though their marriage was not accepted by the complainant. He further stated that, although the police initially refused to register the case, the complainant filed a private complaint before the Court, on the basis of which a case was registered. Therefore, he prayed that the Court grant pre‐arrest bail to the petitioners by allowing the criminal petition. 5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition, submitting that the allegations leveled against the petitioners were heinous in nature and that the investigation had not yet been completed and, at such a stage, granting pre‐arrest bail to the petitioners did not arise. Accordingly, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6.

Further, learned counsel, who had not filed vakalat on behalf of the de‐facto complainant, opposed the bail on the ground that there was suppression of material facts. He submitted that, while suppressing the same, accused No.1 married the victim girl, who is residing with her parents, and that the accused demanded Rs.2,00,00,000/‐ for taking his wife. In view of these serious allegations, he prayed that the Court dismiss the criminal petition.

7.

Accused No.1 and the daughter of the de‐facto complainant appeared before the Court virtually, and the daughter of the complainant stated that she was living happily with accused No.1 and the case filed by her mother was a false complaint.

8.

In light of the submissions made by both the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court deemed it fit to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

i.

The petitioners shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Bandlaguda Police Station, Hyderabad, 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 shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.

iii.

The petitioners shall appear before the concerned Investigating Officer on every Monday for a period of (08) weeks or till the filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier and thereafter, as and when required.

9.

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 17.12.2025 SS

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.16362 of 2025 Date: 17.12.2025 SS