Anticipatory Bail Granted in Rape Case Under S.64(1) BNS Citing Complainant's 'Past Crime History': Telangana High Court

Telangana High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail in Rape Case, Citing Complainant's Alleged 'Habitual' Nature

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of sexual assault under the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), after his counsel presented evidence suggesting the complainant had a history of filing similar false cases and was involved in extortion.

The bench of Justice K. Sujana , while hearing a criminal petition filed by Bodda Girish, allowed the plea for pre-arrest bail, observing that the petitioner had submitted material regarding the "past crime history of the complainant." The court deemed it fit to grant relief despite the "serious allegation" under Section 64(1) of the BNS.

Background of the Case

The case, registered as Crime No. 379 of 2025 at Moinabad Police Station, was initiated based on a complaint filed on June 11, 2025. The complainant alleged that the petitioner, Dr. Girish, whom she met through a job offer, took her to an isolated place in Moinabad after adding a substance to her water. She claimed he sexually assaulted her throughout the night, forced her to perform oral sex, and later blackmailed her for money.

According to her complaint, the petitioner had promised to marry her and make her job permanent but later demanded money, claiming he had substantial debts. She also accused a woman named Deepa of being involved in the matter and stated she had evidence that the petitioner had similarly exploited other women.

Arguments in Court

• Petitioner's Submissions: Ms. S. Nalini Reddy, counsel for the petitioner, vehemently denied the allegations, branding them as entirely false. The defense's central argument was that the complainant is a "habitual complainant" who has previously filed similar false cases against other individuals. To support this claim, the petitioner's counsel presented documents suggesting that the Haryana police had filed criminal cases against the complainant for extortion. It was also submitted that the complainant is a married woman, with a copy of a petition from a Family Court in Gurgaon filed as evidence.

• State's Opposition: Sri D. Arun Kumar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, opposed the bail application, arguing that the offence was "heinous in nature." He emphasized the severity of the allegations under Section 64(1) of the BNS and contended that the petitioner was not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail.

Court's Rationale and Decision

After considering the submissions from both sides, Justice Sujana weighed the seriousness of the rape allegation against the material presented by the petitioner concerning the complainant's background.

The judgment noted:

"Considering the submissions made by the respective counsel and the material on record, the alleged offence against the petitioner is under Section 64 (1) of BNS which is a serious allegation, whereas, the petitioner herein filed the past crime history of the complainant herein showing that she already implicated several persons with the similar allegations... Considering the facts of the case, this Court deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner."

Final Order and Conditions

The High Court allowed the criminal petition, granting anticipatory bail subject to several conditions. The petitioner, Bodda Girish, is required to: 1. Surrender before the concerned Special Sessions Judge in Ranga Reddy District within two weeks. 2. Execute a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties for the same amount. 3. Appear before the Station House Officer (SHO) every Wednesday at 11:00 a.m. for eight weeks to cooperate with the investigation. 4. Abide by all other conditions stipulated under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

This decision highlights the court's willingness to consider the antecedent behavior of a complainant when deciding on pre-arrest bail, even in cases involving grave allegations like sexual assault.