Janardhan Sambaraju 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.17978 of 2025 DATE: 07.01.2026 Between:
Janardhan Sambaraju .... Petitioner/Accused No.3 AND The State of Telangana, Through its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad and another.
.... Respondents
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 petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.3 in Crime No.61 of 2025 of EOW Cyb(Cybderabad) Police Station, Cyberabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the BNS and later, the Sections were altered to Sections 316(2), 318(4) r/w 3(5) of the BNS and Section 5 of the TSPDFE Act, 1999.
- 2 - 2.
The case of the prosecution is that, on 02.09.2025, the de-facto complainant lodged a report before the police stating that he worked as a Chief Marketing Officer at Sri Nandhan Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd from August 2023 to August 2024 and on the assurance of accused No.1, he collected an amount of Rs.2.60 Crores from his friends and relatives and deposited the same in the said company and after collecting the deposits, accused No.1 got registered the plots to some of the depositors, as such, accused No.1 cheated him. Hence, he requested for necessary action. Basing on the said complainant, the police registered a case for the above said offences, wherein the petitioner herein is arrayed as accused No.3. 3.
Heard Sri Challa Apoorva Reddy, 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 herein is no way connected with the said Srinadhan Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd company, which has been incorporated in the year 2021 with ROC Hyderabad and the ROC record does not show his name and the de-facto complainant and accused
- 3 - No.1 are the directors of the said company and whatever the allegations are against other accused and no evidence is collected by the investigating officer to prove the accusations against the petitioner herein and prima facie shows that none of the investors stated in their statements that the petitioner influenced them or any amount is paid to this petitioner and all the other accused were granted bail and the petitioner is having no role in this case and he is entitled for the anticipatory bail and prayed the Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.
5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner stating that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and accused No.1 transferred amount to the petitioner to the tune of Rs.59 lakhs, which is the amount collected from the depositors and therefore, it cannot be said that he is not involved in the present case, though he is not the chairman of the said company and further, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for further investigation and prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.
- 4 - 6.
In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and on a perusal of the material available on record, the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.3 and his role as a chairman, there is no such document collected by the investigating officer to show that he is the chairman of the said company. However, accused No.1 lodged a report against the petitioner herein vide Crime No.187 of 2025, dated 05.02.2025, wherein the allegations against the petitioner is that he took huge amount from her stating that he is in financial trouble and he promised to registered a plot and also remaining amount he will pay and thereafter, she came to know that he called to Aparna constructions to transfer the property in his name, hence, she requested for necessary action and the said complaint is lodged by accused No.1 against accused No.
3, therefore, it cannot be said that accused No.1 transferred the crime proceedings to accused No.3, as there is no evidence to prove the role of the petitioner herein and other accused were already granted bail and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required at this stage.
- 5 - i.
The petitioner shall surrender before the Station House Officer, EOW Cyb(Cybderabad) Police Station, Cyberabad District, within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release him on bail on executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/-, with two sureties, for the like sum each.
ii.
The petitioner shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.
iii.
The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Investigating Officer on every Monday between 09:00 a.m, and 05:00 p.m., for a period of 8 weeks or till the filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier, and thereafter, as and when required.
- 6 - 7.
Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 07.01.2026 TU
- 7 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.17978 OF 2025 DATE : 07.01.2026 TU