Abhinav Chowdhary 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.16699 of 2025 DATE: 19.12.2025 Between:

Abhinav Chowdhary .... Petitioner/accused No.4 AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

.... Respondent/Complainant ORDER:

This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.4 seeking enlargement on bail in Crime No.125 of 2025 of EOW Team-X, CCS, DD Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), r/w 3(5), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and Section 61(2) of the BNS and Section 5 of the TSPDFE Act, 1999.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, on 23.09.2025, the de-facto complainant lodged a report before the police stating that in the month of April, 2024, accused Nos.1 and 2 met Mr. Vikas Kumar Lalwani, who is the brother of one of the partners, at an event in Hyderabad. He introduced himself as a social media marketing expert and made them believe that good returns could be earned in social media marketing if amounts were invested and believing the same, the complainant invested huge amount and also offered him employment in his marketing department on a monthly salary of Rs.1,20,000/- and the petitioner herein not got any returns and on failure, accused Nos.1 and 2 also agreed that interest @ 24% per annum would be payable on the investment plus ROI, but the same was not given to the de-facto complainant, who has invested total amount of Rs.5,39,54,000/- and he came to know that he was cheated by accused Nos.1 to 4. Hence, he requested for necessary action. Basing on the same, the police registered a case for the above said offences. 3.

Heard Sri S. Nagender, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no role played by the petitioner and he is accused No.4 and accused Nos.1 and 2 were already granted anticipatory bail and he is in jail since 18.10.2025 and the material part of the investigation was already completed and 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 it is a huge financial fraud and the investigation is not yet completed, therefore, he is not entitled for the bail and prayed to dismiss this petition. 6.

Having regard to the submissions made by both the learned counsel and the material on record, the petitioner herein is in jail since 18.10.2025 and as seen from the record, accused Nos.1 and 2 were already granted anticipatory bail and further, LWs 1 to 10 witnesses were already examined. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the period of incarceration of petitioner in jail, 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), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) weeks, for the purpose of investigation and thereafter, as and when required.

iii.

The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 483(2) of BNSS.

7.

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

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 19.12.2025 TU

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.16699 2025 Date:19.12.2025 TU