Yenumala Haribabu 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.16676 of 2025 DATE: 29.12.2025 BETWEEN:

Yenumala Haribabu .....petitioner/accused No.1 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.669 of 2025 of Suraram Police Station,

Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1)(A) of Arms Act. 2.

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was arrested on 10.11.2025 near Rajiv Gruhakalpa, Suraram, while on police patrolling duty, on suspicion of possessing an illegal firearm. It was alleged that a damaged pistol with a defective magazine and one empty damaged cartridge shell were recovered from his possession, based on which Crime No.669 of 2025 was registered under Section 25(1)(A) of the Arms Act. The petitioner was taken into custody and remanded to judicial custody.

3.

Heard Sri M.

Keshav Yadav, 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.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was a law-abiding citizen with no prior criminal antecedents and that the seized pistol was in a damaged condition with no live ammunition, thereby

reducing the gravity of the offence. He contended that the investigation was substantially completed, all material witnesses were examined, and the evidence was already in police custody, leaving no scope for tampering. He further submitted that the petitioner was a local resident with strong family roots, was the sole breadwinner of his family, had been in custody since 10.11.2025. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner 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 the allegations leveled against the petitioner are serious in nature. Further, the investigation was not yet completed. At this stage, granting of bail to the petitioner does not arise. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6.

In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner is in jail since 10.11.2025. As seen from the record, the material part of

the investigation has been completed and L.Ws.01 to 09 witnesses have been examined. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the incarceration period of the petitioner, this Court deems it fit 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) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the II ADJ, Medchal.

ii.

The petitioner 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 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section

437(3) of Cr.P.C.(presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

8.

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 29.12.2025 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.16676 of 2025 Date: 29.12.2025 SAI