Chilkuru Sravan Kumar 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.17986 of 2025 DATE: 07.01.2026 Between:
Chilkuru Sravan Kumar .... Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad, Through SHO Rajendranagar, Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate.
.... Respondent/Complainant
O R D E R
This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioner/accused seeking his enlargement on bail in connection with Crime No.1307 of 2025 of Rajendranagar Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 69 and 88 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
- 2 - 2.
The brief facts of the case are that, on 24.11.2025, the defacto complainant lodged a report before the police stating that the petitioner herein is the relative of the de-facto complainant and they acquainted with each other in the year 2022 and the petitioner herein proposed her that he is in love with her and assured that he could marry and used to talk with her over phone and also visited her house in the absence of LW-2 and thereafter, he sexually assaulted her with a belief of lawful marriage and likewise he taken her to the room of his friend in his absence and sexually assaulted her several times due to which she conceived pregnancy and she has narrated the same to the petitioner and asked to marry her.
Then the petitioner with a malafide intention has given some medicines and forcibly administered the same due to which her pregnancy was terminated. Later, the petitioner started blackmailing the defacto complainant by saying that he had her photos in his phone and could viral the same and thereby sexually assaulted her and refused to marry her. Hence, she requested to take necessary action. Basing on the same, the police registered a case for the above said offences.
- 3 - 3.
Heard Sri G. Bandaiah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and in fact, both are relatives and they also wanted to marry each other. It is further submitted that the de-facto complainant has filed a compromise petition and she is interested to marry the petitioner herein and he is in jail since 25.11.2025 and the material part of the investigation has already been completed including the recording of statement under Section 183 of the BNS. Therefore, he prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner.
5.
On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, contending that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and the investigation is not yet completed and there is a threat in the hands of the petitioner to the victim, as such, he is not entitled for the bail at this stage. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
- 4 - 6.
In light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon a perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the petitioner is in jail since 25.11.2025. As recorded in the remand case diary, the prosecution witnesses LWs.1 to 13, including the investigating officer, had already been examined and the de-facto complainant has also filed a compromise petition and she is not having any objection for granting bail to the petitioner. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, including the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the duration of incarceration and also the compromise petition filed by the defacto complainant, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner/accused, 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 the learned XI Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District, at Rajendranagar.
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
- 5 - 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 petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 07.01.2026 TU
- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.17986 OF 2025 DATE : 07.01.2026 TU