CRLP/14694/2026 of Gousia @ Gousiya Begum Vs The State of Telangana on 17 September 2026

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’), seeking the relief of pre-arrest bail.

2. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.7 Crime No.97 of 2023 on the file of the Nizamabad I-Town Police Station, Nizamabad District, facing accusations under Sections 406 and 420 of Indian Penal (for short ‘IPC’).

3. Heard Mr. K.Krishna Kalyan, learned Counsel representing Mr.K.Venumadhav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent -State.

4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the de facto complainant, in his report to the police, alleged that the plots situated in Sy.No.169/3 of Arsapally Village, Nizamabad District, form part of the prohibitory list maintained for the purpose of registration. It is alleged that the accused, pursuant to a conspiracy and in collusion with one another, got seven sale deeds registered in respect of the plots referred to in the complaint. The specific allegation against the petitioner is that one of the said plots was registered in the name of the petitioner under registered Sale Deed No.12652/2022. Based on the said report, the present crime came to be registered.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a bona fide purchaser of the property and had no knowledge of the alleged impersonation or any fraudulent acts attributed to Accused No.1. It is further submitted that there are no circumstances or material on record indicating the petitioner’s involvement in any conspiracy or any positive overt act on his part in the commission of the alleged offences. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner came to know about the registration of the crime only after Accused No.1 was arrested and remanded in connection with the said crime on 22.06.2026. It is also submitted that Accused Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6, who are similarly placed, have already been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Court.

Therefore, the petitioner submits that he is entitled to the same relief on the principle of parity. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by the Court. On these grounds, learned counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and submitted that, as disclosed from the complaint and the investigation conducted thus far, all the accused, acting in furtherance of their common design and dishonestly using forged documents, got the subject plots registered by impersonating the actual owner of the land. It is further submitted that the investigation is still in progress and that the presence of the petitioner may be required for the purpose of a proper and effective investigation. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, however, fairly submits that the other accused, who are stated to be similarly placed, have already been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Court. Nevertheless, having regard to the allegations made against the petitioner, the role attributed, and the nature and gravity of the offences alleged, prayed for dismissal of the present petition.

7. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the materials on record.

8. The allegation against the petitioner is that the accused, by impersonating the owner of the subject property and by using the alleged forged documents, got sale deeds registered in their favour in respect of the plots covered by the prohibitory list maintained by the competent registration authorities. The allegations, therefore, relate to the alleged fraudulent registration of the subject properties and the role attributed to the petitioner is required to be considered in the backdrop of the material collected during the investigation.

9. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the alleged offences, the specific role attributed to the petitioner, and the stage of the investigation, this Court has carefully considered the competing considerations governing the exercise of jurisdiction for grant of anticipatory bail. At the same time, it is also relevant that the accused who are stated to be similarly placed to the petitioner have already been granted anticipatory bail. The principle of parity is undoubtedly a relevant consideration in the matter of bail; however, it is not an absolute or inflexible rule. The Court is required to independently assess the nature of the allegations, the role attributed to the particular accused, the material available against him, the possibility of his fleeing from justice or influencing the investigation, and the necessity, if any, of custodial interrogation. The Supreme Court has consistently held that the considerations governing anticipatory bail are not exhaustive and that the discretion must be exercised on the facts and circumstances of each individual case. Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565; Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1.

10. In the present case, the petitioner has expressed his willingness to cooperate with the investigation and to abide by such conditions as may be imposed by this Court. Further, on the material presently placed before this Court, no specific circumstance has been brought to its notice demonstrating that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is indispensable for the purpose of a fair and effective investigation. Balancing the aforesaid considerations, including the petitioner’s willingness to cooperate with the investigation, the grant of anticipatory bail to the similarly placed accused, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case or the ultimate guilt or innocence of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

11. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed, subject to following conditions. (A) The petitioner/accused No.7 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Nizamabad I-Town Police Station, Nizamabad District on or before 02.10.2026. Upon such surrender or in the event of arrest the Station House Officer shall release his on bail on execution of 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 said officer. (B) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating officer on every Tuesday between 10.00AM to 03.00PM, for a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of his release on bail or until the filing of the final result, whichever is earlier. (C) The petitioner shall remain available for investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer and shall cooperate fully with the investigation. (D) The petitioner shall furnish his complete residential address and contact details to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated throughout the course of investigation. (E) The petitioner shall not either directly or indirectly induce, threaten, influence, or contact any prosecution witness, nor shall he tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (F) The petitioner shall strictly comply with all the conditions contemplated under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

(G) Any wilful breach or violation of any of the aforesaid conditions shall render the petitioner liable to appropriate proceedings before the court below, including cancellation of bail, in accordance with the provisions of the BNSS and other applicable law.

12. It is made clear that any observations made herein are confined solely to the adjudication of the present application for anticipatory bail and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 17.09.2026 CHS

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

CRIMINAL PETITION No.14694 OF 2026

DATE: 17.09.2026

CHS