##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 17232 of 2025

DATE: 31.12.2025

Between:

Kallem Bhasker Reddy and three others

…. Petitioners

AND

The State of Telangana,

Through S.H.O., Kandukur P.S., Rachakonda,

Rep., by its Public Prosecutor,

High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad

…. Respondent

O R D E R

The Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS

praying this Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners

who arrayed as accused Nos.7 to 10 in Crime No.272 of 2025

before the Kandukuru Police Station, Rachakonda

Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable

under Sections 103(1) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya

Sanhita (BNS).

##PAGE2##

2

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 08.11.2025,

Police received a written complaint from one Arun Kumar,

wherein he stated that he, along with the deceased, went

shopping. Thereafter, the deceased informed that he had some

work and would come later. Accordingly, the complainant and

others returned to Mirchi Factory at Gudur Gate. On

08.11.2025, the complainant came to know that the deceased

had not reported for work. He, along with the Police, searched

for the deceased and they found him near SBI Bank.

Immediately, he was shifted to Osmania Hospital, where he

was admitted, examined, and declared dead. They did not

express any adoptive or other persons and stated that he

might have died due to ill health, as he was suffering from ill-

health. Basing on the same, a case was registered under

Section 194 of BNSS. Thereafter, during the investigation, it

was revealed that accused Nos.1 to 10 beat the deceased,

causing injuries from which he died. The postmortem report

also shows that the cause of death was blunt injury to the

abdomen.

##PAGE3##

3

3. Heard Sri C. Hari Preeth, learned counsel for

petitioners, and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor appearing for respondent – State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that

though there are no specific allegations against

petitioners/accused Nos.7 to 10, the petitioners are falsely

implicated in this case solely based on the confession

statements of accused Nos.1 to 5. The offence does not fall

under Section 103(1) of BNS and, therefore, custodial

interrogation is not required in the present case. As such, he

requested the Court to grant bail to the petitioners/accused

Nos.7 to 10.

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public

Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the petitioners, contending that the alleged offence

falls under Section 103 of BNS, for which custodial

interrogation of the petitioners is required for further

investigation. Therefore, they are not entitled to anticipatory

bail. Hence, he prayed that the Court to dismiss the criminal

petition.

##PAGE4##

4

6. Considering the submissions made by the parties and

material available on record, it appears that that the allegation

against the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos.7 to

10, is that they also abused the deceased on the date of the

incident. It is noteworthy that the alleged offence is serious in

nature and the investigation is at the final stage. Considering

the severity of the allegation, the petitioners are not entitled to

anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

closed.

_______________

K. SUJANA, J

Date: 31.12.2025

fm

##PAGE5##

5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.17232 of 2025

Date: 31.12.2025

fm

Click Here to Read the rest of this document