K Srinivas Goud Alias Koneru Srinivas Goud 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.17164 of 2025 DATE: 22.12.2025 BETWEEN:

K.Srinivas Goud and others .....petitioners/accused Nos.1, 2, 5 to 20 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for grant of bail to the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos.1, 2, 5 to 20 in Crime No.318 of 2025 before the

Kosgi Police Station, Narayanpet District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1) of BNS and Section 25(1)(A) of Arms Act, 1959.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the de facto complainant lodged a report before the Police alleging that on 27.11.2025 about 25 persons came to the land claimed by him in Kosgi Town and attempted to attack him, and that the present petitioners were arrayed as Accused Nos. 3 and 4 only on the allegation that they instigated others. It was stated that the offences invoked were under Section 109(1) of the BNS and Section 25(1)(A) of the Arms Act, though there was no allegation that the petitioners possessed or used any weapons. It was further stated that the dispute between the parties related to the same subject land and had its origin in long-standing civil litigation.

3.

Heard Sri Rajagopallavan Tayi, 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 FIR contained vague, omnibus and collective allegations without attributing any specific overt act to the petitioners and that their implication was only on the basis of a bald allegation of instigation. He further submitted that the petitioners were the lawful owners in possession of the land, that the complainant had failed in earlier civil proceedings, and that the present criminal case was a counterblast to the petitioners' earlier complaints and writ petition seeking police protection. He contended that the dispute was purely civil in nature, that the ingredients of the alleged offences were not made out against the petitioners, and that they had been falsely implicated due to long-standing rivalry. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioners by allowing this Criminal Petition.

5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that there are serious allegations against the petitioners. Further, the investigation was not yet completed. At this stage, granting of bail to the petitioners

does not arise. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

6.

In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and upon a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that there have been several legal battles between the parties with regard to the subject land. The record shows that an ad-interim injunction was granted in favour of the petitioners, and there is no order in favour of the de-facto complainant. The allegations also indicate that about 25 persons allegedly came with an intention to kill and however, no injury was caused to any person. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

i.

The petitioners 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 learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, at Narayanpet.

ii.

The petitioners 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 petitioners 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: 22.12.2025 TU

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.17164 of 2025 Date: 22.12.2025 TU