CRLP/8653/2026 of SHAIK SHAKEER AHMED, Vs THE STATE OF TELANGANA on 15 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 petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 4 in FIR No.31 of 2026 of Osmania University City Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 140(2), 308(2) read with 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”).

3. Heard Mr.M.Krishna Chaitanya, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State.

4.1. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that the de facto complainant lodged a report alleging that four persons, dressed in civil clothing and claiming to be police personnel, came to his computer store at Habsiguda. After enquiring about the owner of the premises, they requested to speak with him privately. Without disclosing their identity or producing any official identification, they informed him that criminal cases were pending against him and insisted that he accompany them in their vehicle. They allegedly did not permit him to inform his wife before taking him away. While leaving, they stated that they were attached to IV Town Police Station, Kurnool, and asserted that theft cases were pending against him.

4.2. It is further alleged that, although the de facto complainant consistently denied any involvement in criminal activity, he was first taken to Mailardevarapally Police Station, where, in the presence of a writer and an Inspector, his fingerprints were scanned to verify the alleged pendency of criminal cases against him. After three unsuccessful attempts at verification, the Inspector reportedly informed the petitioners that no criminal case was pending against the de facto complainant. Despite such confirmation, the petitioners allegedly persisted in accusing him and thereafter proceeded to take him towards Kurnool Police Station.

4.3. According to the prosecution, during the journey, the petitioners permitted the de facto complainant to contact his wife. At a petrol bunk, they allegedly filled fuel worth approximately Rs.3,000/- and compelled him to pay the said amount. It is further alleged that they demanded Rs.10,00,000/- from him to settle the matter before reaching Kurnool. Upon negotiations, the demand was allegedly reduced to Rs.3,00,000/-. After the de facto complainant arranged the said amount, the petitioners allegedly agreed to release him. While returning to Habsiguda, they allegedly compelled him to sign Form 41-C without permitting him to read its contents and received Rs.3,00,000/- in cash, carried in a plastic bag, from his brother-in-law. It is further alleged that they demanded a bottle of liquor, which was also arranged.

4.4. Where after upon intervention of the petitioner’s friend, on 22.12.2025, two other police personnel visited the de facto complainant and returned Rs.2,50,000/-, stating that it formed part of the amount earlier collected from him. They also transferred a sum of Rs.14,000/- to the bank account of his nephew through a mobile payment application, stating that the amount had been remitted from their personal account. On the basis of the said report, the present crime came to be registered.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the allegations are false, baseless, and have been levelled solely with a view to falsely implicate the petitioners, who are serving as Police Constables in Kurnool City. It is submitted that the allegations of kidnapping and extortion are wholly untenable and that the petitioners had not acted in their capacity as police officers. Learned counsel further submitted that the de facto complainant has addressed a representation to the Investigating Agency expressing his unwillingness to pursue the complaint. It is also submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the investigation, to appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required, and that, being Government employees with permanent places of residence, there is no likelihood of their absconding or interfering with the investigation. The petitioners further undertake to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. On these grounds, it is prayed that the petitioners be granted the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail.

6. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition, contending that specific allegations have been made against the petitioners and that the investigation is still in progress.

7. Upon considering the rival submissions, this Court directed the respondent-police to secure the presence of the de facto complainant in order to verify the petitioners' contention regarding the affidavit and representation allegedly submitted by him expressing his intention not to pursue the complaint. Pursuant thereto, the de facto complainant appeared before this Court and affirmed that the contents of the affidavit were true and that he had, in fact, submitted a representation to the Investigating Agency stating that he was not inclined to prosecute the matter.

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

8. The allegations against the petitioners are specific in nature. According to the prosecution, the petitioners, under the guise of investigating alleged pending criminal cases against the de facto complainant, took him into their custody, demanded illegal gratification, and allegedly extorted a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-. It is further alleged that, subsequently, a sum of Rs.2,64,000/- was returned to the de facto complainant by certain police personnel, purportedly representing a part of the amount earlier collected from him. These allegations undoubtedly disclose the commission of cognizable offences and require a thorough and uninfluenced investigation in accordance with law.

9. Be that as it may, the de facto complainant has now expressed his unwillingness to pursue the complaint and has affirmed before this Court that he has submitted a representation to the Investigating Agency to that effect. At the stage of considering an application for anticipatory bail, however, such subsequent conduct of the de facto complainant cannot, by itself, be treated as determinative of the rights of the parties or as a circumstance warranting an assessment of the merits of the prosecution case. The jurisdiction under the provision governing anticipatory bail is intended to balance the individual's fundamental right to personal liberty with the legitimate interest of the investigating agency in conducting a fair and effective investigation. The Court is therefore required to examine, inter alia, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the specific role attributed to the accused, the possibility of their absconding, the likelihood of their influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence, the requirement of custodial interrogation, and their willingness to cooperate with the investigation. These principles have been authoritatively laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694; and Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1.

10. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the specific role attributed to the petitioners, their status as Government servants having permanent places of residence, their undertaking to cooperate with the investigation, and the absence of any material at this stage to indicate that they are likely to abscond or evade the process of law, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioners have made out a case for the grant of anticipatory bail. At the same time, the seriousness of the allegations necessitates that the investigation be permitted to proceed unhindered. Accordingly, while keeping all issues on merits, including the truthfulness of the allegations and the culpability of the petitioners, open for consideration by the Investigating Agency and the competent Court at the appropriate stage, the petitioners prayer for grant of anticipatory bail deserves positive consideration, subject to conditions ensuring their availability for investigation and adequately safeguarding the interests of the prosecution.

10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed, subject to the following conditions: (A). The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Osmania University City Police Station, Hyderabad, on or before 30.07.2026. Upon such surrender or in the event of arrest the Station House Officer shall release the petitioners on bail on execution of 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 said Officer. (B) The petitioners shall appear before the Station House Officer on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. to 03.00 p.m. 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 remain available for interrogation as and when required during the course of investigation and shall extend full cooperation to the investigation.

(D) The petitioners shall furnish their complete residential address, mobile number and other contact particulars to the Investigating Officer and shall promptly intimate any change therein. (E) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly induce, threaten, influence, or promise any person acquainted with the facts of the case, nor shall they 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: 15.07.2026 CHS

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

CRIMINAL PETITION No.8653 OF 2026

DATE : 15.07.2026

CHS