Anticipatory bail denied due to prior criminal history and serious nature of allegations.

ORDER:

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioners who are arrayed as accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.256 of 2025 of Mangalhat Police Station, Gosha Mahal Division, Hyderabad, on anticipatory bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed. The offence registered against the petitioners/A-2 and A-3 are under Sections 109 (1) r/w

3(5) of the BNS .

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 14.07.2025, the de-facto complainant lodged a report stating that he, along with his family members, is residing in a house. He runs a Pan shop for livelihood. A few months ago, one person viz., Manmohan Singh, asked him and his friend Vicky Singh to favour him in his illegal ganja business, but they refused. For that, the said Manmohan Singh threatened them that he would see their end whenever the opportunity comes. Later, on 14.07.2025, while he was going to his mother-in-law’s house, Manmohan Singh was present outside his residence and called him. Then he stopped his two-wheeler and talked to Manmohan Singh. Meanwhile, he got a phone call from his friend Vicky Singh; then he talked with him. Immediately, the said Manmohan Singh, keeping the previous grudge in his mind, took his phone and scolded him on mobile. Later, Vicky Singh came in front of Manmohan Singh’s house, then Manmohan Singh and his sons Dhanraj, Abhishek who planned to eliminate them picked up a quarrel with him and attacked them with iron rod. Manmohan Singh, Dhanraj, Abhiskhek beat Vicky Singh with rod multiple times on his right leg, mouth, nose and he sustained bleeding injuries and Dhanraj beat him with iron rod on his left hand, he got injured. Then, they immediately went to Mangalhat Police Station where the police sent them to OGH for medical treatment. In OGH, they received treatment under MLC No. 24479, and Vicky Singh got admitted in OGH for better treatment. Hence, the complainant requested to take necessary action.

3. Heard Mr. A. Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Sri Arun Kumar Doddla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent of the said offences and the allegations are only against the accused No.1. The petitioners are sons of accused No.1. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners by allowing this criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that accused No.1 is a rowdy sheeter and that there are other criminal cases pending against the petitioner/A-2 as well. The allegations are serious in nature; as such, they are not entitled to anticipatory bail. Hence, he prayed that the Court dismiss the criminal petition.

6. In light of the submissions made by both learned counsels and upon perusal of the material available on record, the allegations against the petitioners are that they beat Vicky Singh, who sustained grievous injuries. As seen from the record, accused No.2 is involved in two other crimes registered i.e., Crime Nos.68 and 336 of 2024, for the offence punishable under Section 307 r/w 34 of the I.P.C. Considering the gravity of the allegations and the previous case history, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.