Telangana High Court

CRLP/11376/2026 of Mohammed Abdul Waseem alias Abdul Waseem, Vs The State of Telangana on 22 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11376 OF 2026 DATE : 22.07.2026 Between : Mohammed Abdul Waseem @ Abdul Waseem S/o.Mohammed Abdul Kareem. …Petitioner/ Accused No.6 And The State of Telangana, Rep.byt its Public

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.11376 OF 2026

DATE : 22.07.2026

Between :

Mohammed Abdul Waseem @ Abdul Waseem

S/o.Mohammed Abdul Kareem.

…Petitioner/

Accused No.6

And

The State of Telangana,

Rep.byt its Public Prosecutor,

High Court for the State of Telangana,

Hyderabad.

… Respondent

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 Sections 480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner/accused No.6 seeking to enlarge him on bail in connection with Crime No.440 of 2026 of Adilabad- II Town Police Station, Adilabad District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 331 (4), 305(a) and 317 (2) of the BNS.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant lodged a report before police on 10.07.2026, wherein it is stated that he has K.K.Cotton Commission Agent shop at Tamsi Bus stand, Adilabad and as usual on

SKS,J crlp_11376_2026

09.07.2026 he opened the shop in the morning and closed shop by locking the shutter. Again in the morning on 10.07.2026, his worker went to the shop and after clean he opened the shutter and found that the articles were missing. He immediately telephoned to him and informed the matter. He along with his father rushed to the shop and found that some unknown offenders gained to enter into his shop by break open the back side gate and committed theft of an amount of Rs.18,670/- from two cash counters, Jaquar company bathroom and kitchen taps worth Rs.1,000/-. Basing on the same, police registered a case against the petitioner and other accused for the aforesaid offences. The allegation against the petitioner is that he used to sell the stolen property to accused No.5, who is owner of the scrap shop and the petitioner is used to work in the shop of accused No.5.

3. Heard Sri Soma Ravi Kiran Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.6 and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-State.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.6 is that the petitioner is working in the

SKS,J crlp_11376_2026

shop of accused No.5. According to the prosecution case, notice under Section 35 (3) of BNSS has already been served with accused No.5; that the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 12.07.2026; that material part of the investigation is completed, further incarceration of the petitioner is not required and hence, he requested this Court to grant regular bail to the petitioner-accused No.6.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the same and submits that the petitioner is the receiver of the stolen property; that previously cases were registered against him vide Crime Nos.273 and 276 of 2025; that the petitioner is a habitual offender of stolen property; that if he is released on bail, there is every possibility of committing the similar offences and hence, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 12.07.2026. The punishment prescribed for offence under Section 317 of BNS is below seven years and notice under Section 35 (3) of BNSS was already given to accused No.5. Considering the nature of allegations, period of incarceration

SKS,J crlp_11376_2026

and progress in investigation i.e., L.Ws.1 to 8 were already examined, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner- accused No.6 subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner-accused No.6 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 learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Adilabad.

(ii) On such release, the petitioner-accused No.6 shall appear before the concerned S.H.O. between 09:00 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-accused No.6 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480 (3) of BNSS).

7. Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 22.07.2026 YVL

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