CRLP/11498/2026 of Pandula Mounika, Vs The State of Telangana, on 28 July 2026

ORDER:

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), seeking the relief of anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.3 in FIR No.78 of 2026 on the file of Dharur police station, Vikarabad District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 108 r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short “BNS”).

3. Heard Mr.Rajagopallavan Tayi, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.Surepalli Prashanth, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent/State.

4.1. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the de facto complainant is the father of the deceased, who was employed as a Laboratory Technician at the Government Hospital, Vikarabad. It is alleged that disputes had arisen between the deceased and the petitioner, along with her family members. Earlier, Crime No.141 of 2026 had been registered against the deceased on the complaint lodged by the petitioner, alleging offences relating to sexual exploitation on a false promise of marriage, criminal intimidation and circulation of intimate photographs and videos. The complainant further alleged that, on account of threats and harassment allegedly meted out by the petitioner and other accused the deceased's sister, who was serving as an A.R. Constable, committed suicide on 29.04.2026. In connection therewith, Crime No.59 of 2026 came to be registered against the said persons.

4.2. According to the prosecution, notwithstanding the pendency of the aforesaid criminal proceedings, the deceased continued to be subjected to persistent harassment and intimidation at the hands of petitioner and her associates, including the present petitioner. It is alleged that on 04.06.2026, the deceased was found hanging from a Eucalyptus tree situated near Dharur. During the course of investigation, a handwritten suicide note allegedly authored by the deceased was recovered from his person, wherein the petitioner and certain other accused persons were specifically named as being responsible for compelling him to take the extreme step of ending his life. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the de facto complainant coupled with the contents of the alleged suicide note, the present crime was registered and the petitioner was arrayed as accused No.3.

5.1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present crime on the basis of vague and omnibus allegations without any specific overt act constituting instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid for commission of suicide. It is submitted that the petitioner is employed on a contractual basis in the Government Hospital, Vikarabad, and became acquainted with the deceased. He further submits that entire case is based upon statements of interested family members. Except for such self-serving statements, there is no independent witnesses account, evidence or corroborative material connecting the petitioner with the alleged offence.

5.2. Learned counsel would contend that, except for the allegations contained in the complaint and the purported suicide note, there is no independent material collected during investigation indicating any overt act attributable to the petitioner constituting instigation, intentional aid or active participation in the commission of suicide by the deceased. It is submitted that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen, has no criminal antecedents, is the sole breadwinner of her family, and has expressed her willingness to cooperate with the investigating agency. Apprehending arrest in connection with the subject crime, which would cause irreparable hardship to her and her dependants, he seeks the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail.

6.1. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the petition contending that the allegations against the petitioner are grave in nature and disclose a prima facie case of abetment of suicide punishable under Section 108 of the BNS. It is argued that the present case is not an isolated occurrence but forms part of a continuing chain of events emanating from the disputes between the deceased and the petitioner.

6.2. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that notwithstanding the registration of the crimes at the instance of the petitioner, and after the suicidal death of sister of the deceased, the petitioner and her associates continued to intimidate and harass the deceased. Specific allegations have been made that the petitioner, in concert with the other accused, called the deceased outside the Government Hospital, Vikarabad, and along with the co-accused assaulted and harassed him on several occasions. The deceased is stated to have informed his family members regarding such incidents from time to time.

6.3. It is submitted that on the date of the occurrence, the deceased committed suicide and the suicide note recovered from his pocket specifically attributed responsibility to the accused persons for his death. According to the prosecution, the materials collected during investigation prima facie indicate sustained harassment and mental torture inflicted upon the deceased and, since the investigation is at a nascent stage, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary to ensure a fair, complete and effective investigation. Accordingly, it is argued that the petitioner is not entitled to the extraordinary and discretionary relief of anticipatory bail.

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

8. The petitioner has been implicated in the present crime primarily on the basis of the allegations contained in the complaint and the contents of the suicide note allegedly recovered from the deceased. The material placed before the Court reveals that the present prosecution cannot be viewed in isolation but appears to have emanated from a series of unfortunate events involving disputes between the deceased and the petitioner, culminating in the registration of Crime No.141 of 2026 against the deceased and Crime No.59 of 2026 against the petitioner and others concerning the suicide of the deceased's sister.

9. At this stage, except for the allegations that the petitioner along with other accused, called the deceased outside the hospital premises and participated in acts of assault, there is no substantial material placed before this Court prima facie demonstrating any specific overt act on the part of the petitioner amounting to instigation, intentional aid or active participation immediately preceding the suicide. It is trite law that, to attract the offence of abetment of suicide punishable under Section 108 of the BNS, there must be prima facie material indicating the existence of mens rea on the part of the accused and a direct or proximate act of incitement, instigation or intentional aid which leaves the deceased with no option except to commit suicide.

10. Having regard to the totality of the circumstances, particularly the nature and gravity of the allegations against the petitioner, the fact that he has no criminal antecedents, has expressed his willingness to cooperate with the investigation, and there is no material presently available to indicate that he is likely to abscond, influence witnesses, or tamper with evidence, this Court is of the considered opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner does not appear to be indispensable at this stage. The interests of the investigation can be adequately safeguarded by imposing appropriate conditions to secure the petitioner's availability and cooperation during the course of the investigation, while simultaneously preserving his valuable right to personal liberty.

11. Resultantly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions: (A) The petitioner/Accused No.3 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Dharur Police Station, Vikarabad District on or before 12.08.2026. Upon such surrender or in the event of arrest the Station House Officer shall release her 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 remain available before the Investigating Officer, as and when required during the course of the investigation and shall extend full cooperation to the Investigating Officer.

(C) Additionally, the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating officer on every Tuesday and Thursday between 11.00 am and 02.00 pm for a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of her release on bail or till filing of final result, whichever is earlier. (D) The petitioner shall furnish her complete residential addresses 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.

12. It is made clear that the observations made herein are confined solely to the adjudication of the present application for anticipatory bail and shall not be construed as expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

__________________________ JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI Date: 28.07.2026 mmr

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI

CRIMINAL PETITION No.11498 OF 2026

28.06.2026 mmr