CRLP/14733/2026 of Dasari Bharath Kumar alias Bharat alias Babulu Vs The State of Telangana on 17 September 2026

ORDER

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

2. The petitioner is arrayed as Accused No. 5 in Crime No. 215 of 2026 of Mancherial Town Police Station, Ramagundam District, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 118(1) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”).

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 14733 of 2026

3. Heard Mr. B. Nageshwar Rao, learned counsel, argued on behalf of Mr. Seni Naveen, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing respondent No.1-State. None appeared on behalf of respondent No.2/de facto complainant.

4. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, on 22.04.2026 at about 23:45 hours, the de facto complainant’s son/LW-2, was present at Indhu Bar, Mancherial, along with his friends. It is alleged that Accused No.1, Katikam Shyam, left the place and subsequently returned with certain persons, who allegedly caught hold of LW-2, pushed him against the bar shutters, and assaulted him on his head with empty beer bottles and sticks, with an intention to cause his death. When LW-2’s friend intervened to rescue him, he was also allegedly assaulted on his head with beer bottles and sticks causing bleeding injuries to both of them in the incident. As regards the present petitioner/Accused No.5, the specific allegation is that he accompanied Accused No.1 when the latter returned to Indhu Bar and participated in the alleged assault. Based on these allegations, the present crime was registered.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated, his name having been included at the instance of persons who allegedly influenced the de facto complainant. It is contended that the petitioner had no role in the incident or intention to

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 14733 of 2026

cause injuries to the victims. It is further submitted that the investigation has been completed; Accused Nos.1 and 2 have been granted bail by the trial Court; and Accused No.3 has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 24.08.2026 in Crl.P. No.13352 of 2026. As the petitioner stands on a similar footing, parity is claimed. Learned counsel further submits that, in view of the completion of investigation and the petitioner’s willingness to cooperate with the investigating agency and abide by any conditions, he may be granted anticipatory bail.

6. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the application, contending that the de facto complainant’s son sustained grievous injuries, as evidenced by the medical report, and that the petitioner’s involvement has emerged from the material collected during investigation. It is further submitted that the investigation is still underway and that the petitioner’s custodial interrogation may be necessary for its effective completion. It is, therefore, contended that grant of anticipatory bail at this stage may adversely affect the investigation and that the application is liable to be dismissed.

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

8. The principal allegation against the petitioner is that he, along with the other accused, assaulted the victim with an intention to cause his death and

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 14733 of 2026

thereby caused injuries. However, the material placed before this Court indicates that the petitioner’s alleged involvement came to the knowledge of the de facto complainant through information received from others. The prosecution also relies upon statements of witnesses whose knowledge of the petitioner’s involvement is stated to be derivative. At this stage, the material does not disclose any direct evidence or specific overt act attributable to the petitioner.

9. It is well settled that, while considering an application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, the Court must balance the individual’s right to personal liberty with the interests of a fair and effective investigation. Relevant considerations include the nature and gravity of the accusation, the specific role attributed to the accused, the necessity for custodial interrogation, and the possibility of absconding, influencing witnesses, or tampering with evidence. Mere seriousness of the allegations, by itself, cannot justify denial of anticipatory bail unless custodial interrogation is shown to be necessary. (See Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694; Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1).

10. In the present case, having regard to the material on record and the submissions advanced, this Court finds no material indicating that the petitioner is likely to abscond, influence witnesses, or tamper with evidence.

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 14733 of 2026

The prosecution has also not demonstrated any compelling necessity for his custodial interrogation at this stage. Further, Accused No.3, who is similarly placed, has been granted anticipatory bail. The petitioner has expressed his willingness to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any conditions imposed by this Court. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. The interests of the investigation can be adequately safeguarded by imposing appropriate conditions to ensure his availability before the Investigating Officer and his full cooperation with the investigation.

11. For the aforesaid reasons, this Criminal Petition is allowed, subject to following conditions.

(A) The petitioner/Accused No.5 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Mancherial Town Police Station, Ramagundam on or before 02.10.2026. Upon such surrender or in the event of arrest the Station House Officer shall release him 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/Accused No.5 shall appear before the Investigating officer on every Tuesday and Saturday between 10:00 AM to 03:00 PM, for a period of ten (10) weeks from the

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 14733 of 2026

date of his release on bail and shall cooperate with the investigation in all respects.

(C) The petitioner/Accused No.5 shall furnish his complete residential address and contact details to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated throughout the course of investigation.

(D) The petitioner/Accused No.5 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.

(E) The petitioner/Accused No.5 shall strictly comply with all the conditions contemplated under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

(F) 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

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 14733 of 2026

not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

_______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 17.09.2026 svl