CRLP/10602/2026 of T.L. Aditya Raj Vs The State of Telangana, on 16 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 anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.3 in FIR No.85 of 2025 of Alwal Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”).

3. Heard Mr.C.V.Srinath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Dr.S.Prashanth, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State.

4. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that, on 28.01.2025, the de facto complainant lodged a report alleging that she had purchased a plot admeasuring 180 square yards situated at Andhra Nagar, Old Alwal, under registered Document No.4726 of 2023. At the time of the transaction, the vendors handed over the link documents pertaining to the said plot, including Memo No.E/887/2019 purportedly issued by the Tahsildar, Alwal, wherein it was stated that the plot did not fall within the Full Tank Level (FTL) limits. Subsequently, the de facto complainant came to know that the said representation was false and alleged that accused Nos.1 and 2 had cheated her by selling the plot while suppressing the fact that it was affected by the Full Tank Level limits. On the basis of the said report, the present crime came to be registered.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations against the petitioner are false, baseless, and unfounded, and that the petitioner is innocent and in no way involved in the commission of the alleged offences. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the son of accused Nos.1 and 2. According to the prosecution, the petitioner/accused No.3 and others were present when the de facto complainant paid the sale consideration and were involved in the fabrication of the documents. However, learned counsel submits that these allegations are not supported by any material on record. He further contends that, immediately after registration of the crime, the Investigating Agency issued a notice to the petitioner under Section 35(3) of the BNSS. However, at a later stage, Sections 338 and 49 of the BNS were added only with a view to taking the petitioner into custody. It is also submitted that accused Nos.1, 2, and 4 have already been enlarged on bail by the learned Magistrate on the very same day. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation, appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required, and abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. On these grounds, learned counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

6. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition, contending that there are specific allegations against the petitioner that, in concert with the other accused, he participated in the fabrication of the memo purportedly issued by the Tahsildar and projected the same as genuine to represent that the plot was beyond the Full Tank Level limits. It is further alleged that, by intentionally suppressing the true nature of the property, the accused induced the de facto complainant to enter into the transaction. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submits that the petitioner is the son of accused Nos.1 and 2 and that the investigation is still in progress. According to the prosecution, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary for an effective investigation, and grant of anticipatory bail may adversely affect his cooperation with the Investigating Agency. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the petition.

7. I have considered the rival submissions and carefully perused the material available on record.

8. The gravamen of the allegations against the petitioner is that he was involved in the fabrication of the memo purportedly issued by the Tahsildar, projecting that the subject plot was situated beyond the Full Tank Level limits. However, even according to the prosecution case, there is no specific overt act attributed to the petitioner demonstrating his direct involvement in the fabrication of the said document. The other allegations, namely his presence at the time of the transaction and his knowledge of the payment of sale consideration, by themselves give rise to issues requiring investigation and adjudication.

9. Having regard to these aspects, the settled principles governing the grant of anticipatory bail, the need to balance the protection of individual liberty with the requirements of a fair and effective investigation, the petitioner's expressed willingness to cooperate with the investigation, the absence of any material indicating a likelihood of his absconding, and the absence of any compelling necessity for custodial interrogation at this stage, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail, subject to appropriate conditions to ensure his availability for investigation and to adequately safeguard the interests of the prosecution.

10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed, subject to the following conditions: (A). The petitioner/Accused No.3 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Alwal Police Station, Cyberabad, on or before 31.07.2026. Upon such surrender or in the event of arrest the Station House Officer shall release the petitioner on bail on execution of 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 said Officer. (B) The petitioner shall remain available for interrogation as and when required during the course of investigation and shall extend full cooperation to the investigation. (C) The petitioner shall furnish his complete residential address, mobile number and other contact particulars to the Investigating Officer and shall promptly intimate any change therein. (D) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly induce, threaten, influence, or promise any person acquainted with the facts of the case, nor shall he tamper with prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

11. 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. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 16.07.2026 CHS

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

CRIMINAL PETITION No.10602 OF 2026

DATE : 16.07.2026

CHS