Anticipatory bail in corruption cases requires exceptional circumstances; mere presumption of innocence is insufficient against the need for public justice.

ORDER :

J. SREENIVAS RAO, J.

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ) by the petitioners/accused seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.08/RCO-CR-2/2025 of Anti Corruption Bureau, City Range 2, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 7(c), 13(1)(a) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 , Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 406 , 409 and 420 read with 120-B and 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 .

2. The present case arises from an FIR registered by the Anti- Corruption Bureau (ACB), Hyderabad, based on a complaint dated 12.02.2022 submitted by four research scholars of Osmania University. The complaint alleged that during a routine inquiry into construction activities undertaken during the tenure of Petitioner No.1, several irregularities came to light. The key allegations pertaining to financial mismanagement and procedural violations in the execution of works related to the Regional Centre for Urban and Environmental Studies (herein referred as “RCUES”), a body funded and governed by the Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India, and administratively supported by Osmania University.

2.1. It is alleged that petitioner No.1, during his tenure as Director of RCUES, misused his official position by approving fake quotations in collusion with petitioner No.3 to favour one Mahesh Narayana for construction work valued at Rs.18,82,105/-. The FIR also states that the works were executed through a private consultant rather than through the University's Building Division or other government engineering bodies, resulting in a purported loss of Rs.78.34 Lakhs. Audit reports are said to have raised objections to these transactions. Additionally, allegations against petitioner No.2 states that he embezzled funds while serving as Research Officer in a solid waste management project by misappropriating RCUES resources and diverting them to his private firm, viz., Skyline Archon Private Limited, causing a loss of Rs.1.45 Crores. It is also alleged that several assets, including laptops, were not returned after the project concluded.

3. Heard Mr. V. Murali Manohar, learned counsel representing Mr. S. Nagesh Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. T. Bala Mohan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel and Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent ACB.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed the offence and they were falsely implicated in the present crime. The allegations made in the complaint pertaining to the years 2015-2020, whereas the complaint was lodged on 06.03.2025. The allegations made in the complaint does not attract the ingredients of Sections 7(c), 13(1)(a) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 , Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, against the petitioners.

4.1. He further submitted that the FIR is entirely baseless, politically motivated and filed with significant delay almost five years. It is submitted that RCUES is an autonomous institution, fully funded and governed by the Ministry of Urban Development. As per the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) entered in the year 2013, all administrative and financial powers vested with the Governing Council, chaired by the Vice Chancellor of Osmania University. Petitioner No.1, as Director, had limited authority restricted to routine functioning and was not competent to approve tenders or take financial decisions independently.

4.2. He further submitted that all the works, including the construction of a new dining hall and renovation of RCUES facilities, were duly approved by the Governing Council in its 13th and 14th meetings and executed following standard procedures such as e-tendering. The total project cost is Rs.2.74 Crores, resulting in a saving of Rs.15.49 Lakhs, as confirmed by