Sikligar Kirthipal Singh 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.22 OF 2026 DATE :19.01.2026 Between:

Sikligar Kirthipal Singh & two others ....Petitioners/A.1 to A.3 The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, .....Respondent :ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioners on bail who are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.462 of 2025 of Afzalgunj Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Section 305 (b), r/w.3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Section 25 (1) (A) of the Arms Act.

2.

The facts of the case are that the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before police on 19.11.2025 stating that his younger brother D. Sachin Kumar owned a Honda Shine (CB 125) motorcycle, black colour, bearing registration No. TS 09 EY 9868. On 18.11.2025 at 20:30 hours, he parked the motorcycle in the residential parking area and went home. On the next day, 19.11.2025 morning, when he returned to the parking place, he found that the motorcycle was missing. He searched for it at all possible places but could not find it. Hence, he requested the police for necessary action to trace the missing motorcycle. Basing on the said complaint police registered the case against the accused for the above offences. 3.

Heard Sri Mahmood Khan, learned counsel for petitioners, and Sri E.Ganesh learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent - State.

4.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that petitioners are falsely implicated in this case and they did not commit any offence. The petitioners are businessmen and they are in jail since 21.11.2025. Initially case was registered for the offence under Section 305(b) of BNS and as per the remand case diary the police have also added Arms Act which

does not attract to the petitioners. Further entire investigation is completed except filing of charge sheet. Hence, prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioners.

5.

On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed bail contending that the allegations against the petitioners are severe in nature, petitioners are involved in various crimes in different states and the investigation is still pending. Therefore, petitioners are not entitled for bail and prayed to dismiss the criminal petition.

6.

Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and material on record, the petitioners herein are A.1 to A.3 and they are in jail from 21.11.2025. Though learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed bail stating that there are several cases pending against the petitioners in Madhya Pradesh and New Delhi, the main allegation against the petitioners herein is that parked vehicle of the complainant was committed theft. Considering the allegations and also the period of incarceration of petitioners in jail, this Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioners/A.1 to A.3 subject to the following conditions.

i. The petitioners/A.1 to A.3 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 II-Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hyderabad.

ii. The petitioners/A.1 to A.3 shall appear before the concerned SHO between 09.00 a.m and 5.00 p.m., on every Wednesday for a period of eight (8) weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

iii. The petitioners/A.1 to A.3 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 483(2) of the BNSS.

7.

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

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 19.01.2026 Rds

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.22 OF 2026 Date: 19.01.2026 Rds