CRLP/10477/2026 of Gollapally Ram Murthy Vs State of Telangana on 15 July 2026

O R D E R:

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.5 and 29 in FIR No.3 of 2026 of Thungathurthy Police Station, Suryapet District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 132, 191(2), 191(3), 324(3) read with 190 of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short, “BNS”) and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (for short, “PDPP Act”).

3. Heard Mr.D.Bala Mallesh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State.

4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 15.11.2026, while the de facto complainant and the Special Party police team were attempting to shift the dead body of a person who had died of a heart attack, the petitioners, along with the other accused, allegedly created a law-and-order problem. The specific allegation against the petitioners is that, in furtherance of their common intention, they obstructed the shifting of the dead body. It is further alleged that petitioner No.1 wielded a Jamal stick, while petitioner No.2 assisted the other accused in preventing the police from discharging their duties. Based on the report submitted by the Circle Inspector of Police, the present crime came to be registered.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations against the petitioners are baseless and unsupported by any credible material. It is contended that the accusation that the petitioners, along with the other accused, attacked the police personnel and created a nuisance is devoid of substance and is not supported by any material evidence. It is further submitted that the petitioners, being villagers, have been falsely implicated without even conducting a preliminary enquiry. Nevertheless, the petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and undertake to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Thus prayed for granting anticipatory bail.

6. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and submitted that the petitioners, along with the other accused, attacked the police personnel while they were discharging their official duties. It is further submitted that the acts done by the petitioners during

the occurrence has been clearly made out, and that, they are not available for investigation, and their custodial interrogation may be necessary. According to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the grant of anticipatory bail at this stage is likely to adversely affect the investigation. Accordingly, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.

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

8. The allegations against the petitioners are that, along with the other accused, they created a law-and-order problem and assaulted the police personnel while the latter were discharging their official duties. The prosecution further alleges that the petitioners actively participated in obstructing the lawful discharge of official functions and thereby committed the offences alleged in the crime.

9. It is well settled that, while considering an application for anticipatory bail, the Court is required to strike a delicate balance between the fundamental right to personal liberty and the legitimate interest of the investigating agency in conducting a fair, effective, and unhindered investigation. Further, in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Constitution Bench reaffirmed that anticipatory bail is a device to secure individual liberty and that its grant ordinarily should not be circumscribed by arbitrary limitations. The Court also observed that the necessity for such custodial interrogation must be demonstrated on the facts of the particular case.

10. In the present case, having regard to the nature of the accusations, the specific overt act attributed to the petitioners, the material placed before the Court, and the absence of any convincing material indicating that the petitioners are likely to abscond, this Court does not find any compelling necessity for their custodial interrogation at this stage of the investigation. Balancing the competing interests of safeguarding the petitioners' personal liberty and ensuring a fair and effective investigation, this Court is inclined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction and grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to conditions to secure their presence during the course of investigation.

11. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed, subject to the following conditions: (A). The petitioners/Accused Nos.5 and 29 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Thungathurty Police Station, Suryapet District, 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 Investigating officer on every Saturday between 09.00AM to 05.00PM, for a period of ten (10) 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 she tamper with prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

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

__________________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 15.07.2026 mmr

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

CRIMINAL PETITION No.10477 OF 2026

DATE : 15.07.2026

mmr