CRLP/10992/2026 of Bobbilli Chinna Gangaram Vs The State of Telangana., on 21 July 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 petitioners are arrayed as Accused Nos. 3 and 6 in FIR No. 243 of 2015 of Patancheru Police Station, Medak District (Sangareddy District), facing accusations for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”)

3. Heard Mr. C. Hari Preeth, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent-State.

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 10992 of 2026

4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant alleged that certain registered documents relating to his immovable property were fraudulently created and that sale deeds were executed in favour of Accused Nos.1 and 2, despite his continuing to be the lawful owner and without his having received any sale consideration. The complaint further alleges that two registered sale transactions in respect of the same property were brought into existence without his knowledge. It is further alleged that the accused, by impersonating the complainant and forging his signatures and identity particulars, created fabricated documents and used the same to secure mutation of the property in the revenue records, with the dishonest intention of causing wrongful loss to the complainant and corresponding wrongful gain to themselves. On the basis of the complaint, the present crime was registered for investigation.

5.1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations in the complaint are omnibus in nature and do not attribute any specific overt acts to the petitioners. It is further submitted that the FIR was registered in the year 2015 and that some of the accused had earlier filed Criminal Petition No.1625 of 2016 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the proceedings, wherein this Court granted an interim stay of investigation. Consequently, the investigation remained stalled for a considerable period. It is further submitted that, by order dated 07.04.2026, this Court disposed of the said petition, directing the Investigating Agency to proceed with the

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 10992 of 2026

investigation while observing that, owing to the prolonged operation of the interim stay, the investigation had not progressed sufficiently to ascertain the existence of prima facie material against the petitioners.

5.2. Learned counsel further submits that this Court, by order dated 22.06.2026 in Crl.P. No.8794 of 2026, granted anticipatory bail to Accused Nos.4 and 5 in the same crime. It is contended that the petitioners are law- abiding citizens, have no intention to abscond or tamper with the evidence, and are willing to cooperate fully with the investigation. Apprehending arrest and coercive action, and having regard to the inordinate delay since registration of the crime coupled with the absence of specific allegations against them, learned counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

6.1. Per contra, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the application, contending that the petitioners have been arrayed as accused on the basis of specific averments in the complaint and that the allegations disclose serious offences involving impersonation, forgery, and fraudulent alienation of immovable property. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, however, fairly conceded that the earlier criminal petition filed by some of the accused seeking quashing of the proceedings was disposed of with a direction to the Investigating Agency to proceed with the investigation. Nevertheless, having regard to the gravity of the allegations, it is contended that the petitioners should be directed to cooperate with the investigation

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 10992 of 2026

and that the present application for anticipatory bail does not warrant favourable consideration.

7. I have careful consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record.

8. Admittedly, the crime was registered in the year 2015. It is also not in dispute that the investigation remained substantially stalled for a considerable period on account of the interim order passed by this Court staying further investigation. Subsequently, by an order disposing of the earlier criminal petition, this Court permitted the Investigating Agency to proceed with the investigation.

9. At the stage of considering an application for anticipatory bail, this Court is not required to undertake a meticulous appreciation of the evidence or record findings on the merits of the rival allegations. The parameters governing the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 are well settled. The Court is required to consider, inter alia, the nature and gravity of the accusation, the specific role attributed to the accused, their antecedents, the likelihood of their fleeing from justice, the possibility of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, and the necessity, if any, for custodial interrogation.

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 10992 of 2026

10. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, having regard to the considerable lapse of time since the registration of the crime, the prolonged pendency of the investigation owing to the interim order of this Court, the petitioners' expressed willingness to cooperate with the Investigating Agency, the absence of any material indicating a likelihood of their absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, and there being no compelling circumstances placed before this Court necessitating their custodial interrogation at this stage, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioners have made out a fit case for the grant of anticipatory bail. However, such relief shall be subject to appropriate conditions to ensure their continued cooperation with the investigation and to safeguard the interests of the prosecution.

11. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioners shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail, subject to the following conditions:

(A) The petitioners/Accused Nos.3 and 6 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Patancheru Police Station, Medak District (Sangareddy District) on or before 05.08.2026. Upon such surrender or in the event of arrest the Station House Officer shall release them on bail on execution of a personal bonds for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each, with two sureties for a like sum each, to the satisfaction of the said officer.

NTR,J Crl.P. No. 10992 of 2026

(B) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Thursday between 11:00 am and 02:00 pm for a period of twelve

(12) weeks from the date of their release on bail and shall cooperate with the investigation in all respects. (C) The petitioners shall furnish their complete residential addresses and contact details to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated throughout the course of investigation. (D) The petitioners shall not either directly or indirectly induce, threaten, influence, or contact any prosecution witnesses, nor shall they tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (E) Any willful breach or violation of any of the aforesaid conditions shall render the petitioners 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 not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

_______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J

Date: 21.07.2026 svl