Telangana High Court
CRLP/11251/2026 of Sharukh Khan Vs STATE OF TELANGANA on 21 July 2026
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11251 of 2026 DATE: 21.07.2026 Between: Sharukh Khan …. Petitioner-Sole Accused AND STATE OF TELANGANA, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, In the High Court of Telangana. ….
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.11251 of 2026
DATE: 21.07.2026
Between:
Sharukh Khan
…. Petitioner-Sole Accused
AND
STATE OF TELANGANA,
Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,
In the High Court of Telangana.
…. Respondent-Complainant.
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 seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail, who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.298 of 2026 of Echoda Police Station, Adilabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), Section 12 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 25.06.2026, the de- facto complainant, who is mother of the victim, lodged a report before the Police stating that her third daughter, aged about 16
years, studying Intermediate Second Year, had left the house on 24.06.2026 without informing any of the family members and did not return home. Despite making efforts to trace her, the complainant could not ascertain the victim's whereabouts and therefore, 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) of BNS. During the course of the investigation, after tracing the victim and recording her statement, the section of law was altered to the offences mentioned above.
3. Heard Sri B. Manav Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even according to the statement of the victim, no offence is made out against the petitioner and that the petitioner accompanied the victim to Nirmal, from where they travelled by bus to Nizamabad and thereafter by train to Hyderabad, and remained at the Secunderabad Railway Station. He further submitted that the petitioner did not marry the victim as he know that she was a minor and thereafter, ensured that she was safely returned to her home. He further contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and 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 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 fact that there are no specific allegations made by the victim against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner/Accused 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) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate at Boath.
ii. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.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: 21.07.2026 SS
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.10948 of 2026
Date: 21.07.2026 SS