The court denied anticipatory bail based on the grave nature of allegations and the risk of evidence tampering, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges faced by the petitioners.

ORDER :

1 This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1, 3 to 9 and 11, seeking anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNS S ), in connection with Crime No.107 of 2025 on the file of Musheerabad Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109 (1), 74, 333, 324(4), 351(3) read with 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 ( BNS ).

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.1, 3 to 9 and 11 and Mr.V.Jithender Rao, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. Perused the material available on record.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the de facto complainant/victim/LW.1 has been residing at Siddique Nagar, Bholakpur, Musheerabad, Hyderabad, for the past 40 years along with her family members. There is a house next to her house which belongs to one Khalil (accused No.1), who has rented it out and the remaining houses in the same locality belonged to the relatives of accused No.1. It is alleged that accused No.1 used to demand the de facto complainant to sell away her house to him and when she refused to do so, he used to threaten her with dire consequences. While so, on 17.04.2021 when she was proceeding with construction in her premises, accused No.1 came to her premises and started arguing with the workers, in that process, accused No.1 along with other accused beat the de facto complainant and her family members with iron rods, sticks and brick, as a result thereof, they were sustained injuries.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners herein are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case only to wreck vengeance against the petitioners in view of the previous disputes between the parties and that the allegations made by the de facto complainant are omnibus against them and the specific overt acts are also not attributed. The petitioners are the sole bread winners of their families. In the event of grant of bail, the petitioners are ready to furnish the required sureties and to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioners herein.

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed for grant of bail stating that the allegations levelled against the petitioners are very serious in nature. He further submitted that the petitioners not only assaulted the de facto complainant and other residents and again the petitioners herein attacked them while they were receiving treatment at Gandhi Hospital. He further contended that the investigation is still in progress and if the petitioners are released on bail at this stage, they may tamper with the evidence and may threaten the witnesses. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. In view of the submissions made by both the parties and upon perusal of the material on record, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners/accused Nos.1, 3 to 9 and 11 at this stage as the allegations made against the petitioners are grave and serious in nature.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.