CRLP/10557/2026 of Syed Tousif Ahmed, Vs The State of Telangana, on 14 July 2026

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.762 of 2026 before the Chaitanyapuri Police Station,

Malkajgiri District, registered for the offence punishable under Section 69 of BNS.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the prosecution alleges the petitioner and the de facto complainant were acquainted for nearly two years and maintained a physical relationship on the alleged promise of marriage. It is further alleged that the petitioner subsequently refused to marry the complainant, resulting in registration of the present crime. The petitioner was arrested on 07‑06‑2026 and has been in judicial custody since then. Investigation has progressed and statements of material witnesses have been recorded.

3. Heard Sri P. Vikasraj, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent‑State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire prosecution case arises out of a failed personal relationship between two consenting adults, and whether there was a false promise of marriage from inception is a matter of evidence to be adjudicated at trial. It is contended that the petitioner has cooperated with investigation, is a permanent resident of Hyderabad, employed as a Manager, and has deep roots in society. He is the sole breadwinner of his family consisting of his wife and three minor children, who are facing severe financial hardship due to his incarceration. On these grounds, he prayed to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions, contending that the allegations disclose an offence under Section 69 BNS and involve serious questions of fact. He prayed this Court to dismiss the petition.

6. Having regard to the rival submissions and on perusal of the material placed on record, it is noted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 07‑06‑2026. The relationship between the parties is admitted, and the allegations pertain to promise of marriage. LWs.1 to 10 are already examined. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the stage of investigation, and the period of incarceration, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to compliance of following conditions:

i. The petitioner shall execute 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 IV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate cum IV AJCI, Cyberabad, at LB.Nagar, RR District.

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, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 14.07.2026 PT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.10557 of 2026

Date: 14.07.2026 PT