Telangana High Court

CRLP/11264/2026 of K.Shobharani Vs The State of Telangana on 24 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11264 of 2026 DATE: 24.07.2026 Between: K. Shobharani …. Petitioner-A1 AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT

HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.11264 of 2026

DATE: 24.07.2026

Between:

K. Shobharani

…. Petitioner-A1

AND

The State of Telangana,

Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,

High Court for the State of Telangana,

Hyderabad.

…. Respondent-Complainant.

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

:O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 480 and 483 of BNSS seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail, who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.119 of 2026 of Peddemul Police Station, Vikarabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 140(4), 137(2), 118(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 27.06.2026, the de-facto complainant, who is mother of the victim, lodged a report before the Police stating that her son had been working as a driver for accused No.1 for the past two years. Suspecting an illicit relationship between his wife and the complainant's son, accused No.2, assaulted the victim at a guest house in Tandur on 24.06.2026 and threatened him with dire consequences. On 26.06.2026 at about 9:30 p.m., after the victim left home to visit his friend’s shop at Peddemul, accused Nos.3 and 4, came in a car assaulted the victim with sticks and forcibly took him away in accused No.1’s car towards Tandur. Therefore, she requested the police to take necessary action. Based on the said complaint, the police initially registered a case for the offence punishable under Section 137(2), 118(1) read with 3(5) of BNS. During the course of the investigation, Section 140(4) of BNS was added and Section 118(1) of BNS was altered to 118(2) of BNS.

3. Heard Sri T. Pradhmunya Kumar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri T.S. Anirudh Reddy, learned counsel on record for the petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has no connection with the allegations levelled against her and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 29.06.2026 and that a substantial part of the investigation has already been completed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

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 levelled against the petitioner are serious and grave in nature, as the victim sustained grievous injuries and was allegedly assaulted by the accused on two occasions and that the investigation is still in progress and prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

6. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 29.06.2026. As per the remand case diary, the prosecution witnesses, namely LWs.1 to 15, have already been examined. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the stage of investigation, the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner and the nature of allegations, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail, 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 Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Tandur, Vikarabad District.

ii. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO between 11:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., on every Monday 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 petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 24.07.2026 SS

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.11264 of 2026

Date: 24.07.2026 SS

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead