Telangana High Court
CRLP/10799/2026 of Akshaya Kumar Naik Vs The State of Telangana on 21 July 2026
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10799 OF 2026 DATE : 21.07.2026 Between : Akshaya Kumar Naik S/o. Akrur Naik. …Petitioner/ Accused And The State of Telangana, Rep.byt its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.10799 OF 2026
DATE : 21.07.2026
Between :
Akshaya Kumar Naik
S/o. Akrur Naik.
…Petitioner/
Accused
And
The State of Telangana,
Rep.byt its Public Prosecutor,
High Court for the State of Telangana,
Hyderabad. Through S.H.O
Uppal Police Station, Medchal-
Malkajgiri District.
… Respondent
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
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 seeking to enlarge him on bail in connection with Crime No.499 of 2026 of Uppal Police Station, Malkajgiri Division. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 109 (1), 64 read with 62 of the BNS.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant lodged a report before police on 15.04.2026, wherein it is stated that she is working as Business Manager
SKS,J crlp_10799_2026
at Teksky, DSL IT Abacus, Uppal and residing at Ayyappa Society, Madhapur. It is stated that she attended the office work as usual on 15.04.2026 and after stepping out towards washroom area to attend a phone call from her home and while returning after using the washroom, she approached an unknown person, who on the false pretext that the emergency door was not opening and requested her to check it. On verification, she came to know that they are working properly. The said unknown person suddenly without any provocation forcibly grabbed her, tightly covered her mouth and nose, dragged her towards the emergency staircase, causing difficulty in breathing tightly held her throat, and attempted to undress her with an intention to commit rape on her. While also threatening to kill her with a fire extinguisher when she raised cries, her colleagues rushed to the spot and seeing them, the accused while attempted to flee away, he fell down and sustained injuries. Hence, she requested the police to take necessary action against the complaint. Basing on the same police registered a case against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences.
SKS,J crlp_10799_2026
3. Heard Ms.R.Sindhulatha, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-State.
4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against him; that he has been in judicial custody since 15.04.2026; that even after completion of 90 days period, no charge sheet is filed, as such requested the Court to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the same and submits that the offences alleged against the petitioner are heinous and serious in nature, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail. He further submits that though requisition is filed on 24.06.2026 for recording of statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS as on today, the same is not recorded, therefore, the respondent are unable to file charge sheet and finally requested this Court 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 15.04.2026. The record shows that even after completion of
SKS,J crlp_10799_2026
90 days period, no charge sheet is filed. Considering the nature of allegations, period of incarceration and progress in investigation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner-accused subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner-accused 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 VI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal, Malkajgiri District, Uppal at L.B.Nagar.
(ii) On such release, the petitioner-accused 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 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: 21.07.2026 YVL