CRLP/10000/2026 of Mr. Sukumar Vs State of Telangana on 8 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 the accused No.5 in FIR No.108 of 2026 on the file of Mahabubabad Town Police Station, Mahabubabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”)

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Syed Yasar Mahmood, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State.

4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 19.03.2026 at about 07:30 P.M., when the brother of the de facto complainant was present in the canteen, the petitioner along with his friends went to annexed wine shop and, after consuming liquor, entered into a quarrel among them. During the said incident, they allegedly threw canteen utensils and kitchen articles. In the course of the said commotion, the brother of the de facto complainant intervened and pushed them out of the canteen, during which he allegedly came into physical contact with the petitioner. Subsequently, on 21.03.2026, accused Nos.1 and 2 went to the wine shop and asked for snacks from the canteen. When the brother of the de facto complainant served the snacks, accused No.1 allegedly threw the same on the face of the de facto complainant’s brother, which resulted in an altercation. It is further alleged that accused No.1 threw a beer bottle at the brother of the de facto complainant, entered into the canteen, assaulted him, and stabbed him with a knife in the stomach. It is further alleged that accused Nos.2 to 4 also participated in the attack. Based on the aforesaid allegations, the present crime came to be registered.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that, even according to the prosecution version, the petitioner/accused No.5 was not present at the scene of occurrence when the alleged incident dated 21.03.2026 took place and he was at Hyderabad and had no connection whatsoever with the alleged incident. It is contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated solely on account of his relationship and acquaintance with the other accused persons. It is further submitted that the implication of the petitioner appears to be based only on the alleged confessional statement of accused No.1, without any independent corroborative material or consequential investigative steps establishing his involvement. It is also submitted that the petitioner has no intention to evade the process of law and is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigating agency. The petitioner undertakes to appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and to strictly comply with any conditions that may be imposed. Therefore, prays that the petitioner may be granted the protection of pre-arrest bail.

6. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the application, contending that the incident dated 21.03.2026 was a consequence of the earlier incident dated 19.03.2026 involving the petitioner, and that the subsequent attack was carried out at the instance of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner and the other accused persons acted with a common intention in furtherance of the alleged offence. He further submits that the investigation is still at a nascent stage and that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary to ascertain the relevant facts and circumstances surrounding the offence. It is therefore contended that grant of anticipatory bail at this stage may hamper the effective investigation of the case, and accordingly prayed for dismissal of the application.

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

8. The prosecution alleges that the incident dated 21.03.2026 occurred at the instance of the petitioner as a continuation of the earlier incident dated 19.03.2026, and that the other accused persons executed the alleged act pursuant to his instigation. However, the material presently placed before this Court prima facie indicates absence of any specific allegation regarding the physical presence and active participation of the petitioner at the time of the alleged assault. The aspects relating to common intention, instigation, and the precise role attributed to the petitioner are matters which require further investigation and, ultimately, appreciation on the basis of evidence during trial.

9. The principles governing the grant of anticipatory bail are well settled. In Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565, the Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the power to grant anticipatory bail, though extraordinary in nature, is a salutary remedy intended to safeguard the personal liberty of an individual against arbitrary and unnecessary arrest. The Hon’ble Supreme Court emphasized that such discretion must be exercised judiciously, having due regard to the facts and circumstances of each case, the nature of allegations, the role attributed to the accused, and the requirement of investigation.

10. In the instant case, having regard to the nature of allegations made against the petitioner, the absence of material at this stage indicating his direct participation in the alleged assault, the absence of any circumstance suggesting likelihood of absconding, and there being no compelling material demonstrating the necessity of custodial interrogation, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. However, subject to appropriate conditions to ensure his cooperation and non-interference with the course of investigation.

11. For the aforesaid reasons, this Criminal Petition is allowed, subject to following conditions.

(A) The petitioner/Accused No.5 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Mahabubabad Town Police Station, Mahabubabad District on or before 23.07.2026. Upon such surrender or in the event of arrest the Station House Officer shall release him 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 petitioner shall appear before the Investigating officer on every Saturday between 10.00AM to 03.00PM, for a period of eight

(08) weeks from the date of his release on bail and shall cooperate with the investigation in all respects. (C) The petitioner shall furnish his complete residential address and contact details to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated throughout the course of investigation. (D) The petitioner shall not either directly or indirectly induce, threaten, influence, or contact any prosecution witness, nor shall he tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (E) The petitioner shall strictly comply with all the conditions contemplated under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

(F) Any willful breach or violation of any of the aforesaid conditions shall render the petitioners liable to appropriate proceedings before the Court concerned, including cancellation of bail, in accordance with the provisions of the BNSS and other applicable laws.

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: 08.07.2026 CHS

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

CRIMINAL PETITION No.10000 OF 2026

DATE : 08.07.2026

CHS