CRLP/9930/2026 of Mohd Tanveer @Thannu Mohd Mehraj Khan Vs The State of Telangana on 13 July 2026

: ORDER :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by the petitioner praying this Court to enlarge him on bail who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.111 of 2026 of Ramgopalpet Police Station, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 74, 75(2), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 25.05.2026 at about 07.00 p.m., the de facto complainant lodged a complaint alleging that her parents are living separately from April 2025, and she is residing with her mother, who developed a relationship with the petitioner/accused. It is alleged that on two occasions in November and December 2025, the accused misbehaved with the complainant and subjected her to acts amounting to sexual harassment while staying at their residence. The complainant informed her mother about the incidents, and it is alleged that the accused assured that such conduct would not be repeated. However, he allegedly continued his inappropriate behavior and also threatened the complainant with dire consequences, if she disclosed the incidents to anyone. Due to fear and mental distress, the complainant shifted to her grandparents' house in April 2026. Subsequently, when she visited her mother's residence on 23.05.2026 and questioned the presence of accused, he allegedly criminally intimidated her with threats to her life. Hence requested the police to take necessary action against the accused, basing on which the present crime is registered.

3. Heard Sri G.L.Narasimha Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent NO.1-State, and Sri Aashir Mehtab Khan, learned counsel for respondent No. 2.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that the allegations made against him are baseless and fabricated. He further submitted that the petitioner belonging to a respectable family, is innocent and has no connection whatsoever with the alleged offences and that, due to previous disputes and personal grudges between the petitioner and the family of de facto complainant, a false complaint was lodged against him with the active support of the police. He further contended that the respondent police registered the case and arrested the petitioner without conducting proper investigation or enquiry and that he has been in judicial custody since 25.05.2026. Hence, prayed this Court to grant bail by allowing this petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail contending that petitioner the offence committed by the petitioner is a serious and heinous one. Further, the petitioner is involved in 26 criminal cases and he is a habitual offender. As such, petitioner is not entitled to bail and prayed to dismiss this petition.

6. Learned counsel for respondent NO.2, submitted that the allegations in the present case are grave, involving repeated acts of trespass, sexual harassment, and criminal intimidation, which have caused severe fear and forced the victim to relocate for safety. It is contended that, if the accused is granted bail, there is a high likelihood of tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, absconding, and causing further harm to the victim. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

7. Having regard to rival submissions made, and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that though the allegations are serious, they require adjudication during trial and no conclusive opinion can be formed at this stage. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 25.05.2026 and further detention is not necessary. However, considering the apprehensions expressed by the prosecution and respondent No.2, this Court is inclined to grant bail with 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 XXII ACMM, Secunderabad.

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: 13.07.2026 PT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.9930 of 2026

Date: 13.07.2026 PT