Meka Om Sai Raghavendra Rao v. State Of Telangana, Through Domalguda,

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.17538 of 2025 DATE: 06.01.2026 BETWEEN:

Meka Om Sai Raghavendra Rao .....petitioner/accused 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.259 of 2025 before the Domalaguda Police

Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8(C), 22(c), 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act. 2.

The brief facts of the case are that a complaint dated 19.08.2025 lodged by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Domalguda P.S., stating that during patrolling at around 17:30 hours, a suspicious black Nissan Magnite car bearing No. TG 08 G 5723 was intercepted near Gate-1, NTR Stadium. Two individuals, Meka Om Sai Raghavendra Rao and Nikhil, were apprehended while allegedly attempting to flee. Upon search, the police reportedly seized 12.57 grams of MDMA, 305 grams of ganja, three mobile phones, a car, a bag, and cash of Rs.1080/-.

3.

Heard M. Mahesh, 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.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case on the basis of fabricated allegations and a policecreated confession and that the petitioner was a Rapido driver

earning a modest livelihood, supporting his aged parents, and his prolonged incarceration since 20.08.2025 caused severe hardship to his family. He further submitted that the investigation had been completed, material witnesses were examined, nothing remained for further investigation except filing the charge sheet, and therefore there was no possibility of tampering with evidence. 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 petitioner is a drug peddler. He further submitted that the investigation is in progress and if the petitioner is released on bail, at this stage, he may tamper with the evidence and may threaten the witnesses. Hence, 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 20.08.2025. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed and L.Ws.1 to 13 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 learned X Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Secunderabad.

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).

7.

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

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 06.01.2026 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.17538 of 2025 Date: 06.01.2026 SAI