Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. SUJANA
Mokhamatam Satish Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for anticipatory bail filed under specific laws. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments presented by both sides regarding the case. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court observes potential evidence of caste-based offences. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. final ruling on the bail application. (Para 9 , 10) |
ORDER :
K. Sujana, J.
This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 by the petitioner/A.1 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.1242 of 2025 of KPHB Colony, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Medchal Malkajgiri District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘SC/ST Act’).
2. The facts of the case are that a complaint was lodged by the complainant on 22.09.2025 stating that in the year 2021, the complainant got acquainted with the petitioner herein Mokhamatam Satish Kumar, residing in the same colony and expressed his love and proposed marriage, which she initially ignored. His elder sister, Padmini, then spoke to her and assured that the marriage would happen. Based o
Anticipatory bail was denied based on prima facie evidence of offences under the SC/ST Act amid allegations of caste-based abuse.
Allegations of sexual intercourse based on a promise of marriage may constitute an offence under the SC/ST (PoA) Act, despite consent, necessitating denial of anticipatory bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
