THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9618 of 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.10/RCT-ACB-RRR/2025 on the file of the ACB, Ranga Reddy Range, Telangana.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, Sri K. Surender, Panchayat Secretary of Inmulnarva Village, Kothur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, was alleged to have demanded Rs.1,00,000/- and accepted Rs.50,000/- from a complainant in exchange for showing official favour by setting aside a construction-related notice. A case was registered by the Telangana Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) against him under Crime No.10/RCT-ACB-RRR/2025. On 25.07.2025, the petitioner allegedly accepted the bribe near Indiana Hotel, Shamshabad, and absconded in his Mahindra SUV, which was later recovered along with the bribe amount. The ACB press note dated 26.07.2025 stated that the petitioner was absconding. The petitioner came to know about the allegations through the press note, and the investigation by ACB was underway.

3. Heard Sri T. Srujan Kumar Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri T. Bala Mohan Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for ACB appearing on behalf of the respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was a law-abiding citizen and was falsely implicated in the case and that the petitioner had not demanded or accepted any bribe and was not present at the scene of the alleged offence. He further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner were baseless, concocted, and possibly motivated by political rivalry or personal enmity and that the petitioner had a clean record of public service, had no prior criminal involvement, and was willing to cooperate with the investigation, abide by any conditions imposed by the Court, and appear whenever required. He emphasized that custodial interrogation was unnecessary as no material evidence was to be recovered from the petitioner. He contended that arresting the petitioner would cause irreparable harm to his career, reputation, and family life. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel for the ACB submitted that the averments made by the Petitioner/AO were false, baseless, and intended to mislead the Court to obtain anticipatory bail and that the petitioner had initially demanded Rs.1,00,000/- as a bribe to set aside a notice issued to the complainant and had subsequently accepted Rs.50,000/- from the complainant on 25.07.2025. He emphasized that the petitioner fled the scene in his XUV 700 car, driving in a high-speed and dangerous manner to evade the trap party, and continued absconding despite the ACB’s efforts to apprehend him. He further submitted that digital evidence, including recorded WhatsApp calls and spy gadget footage, corroborated the complainant’s account of the bribe demand, reduction, and acceptance. He also stated that the petitioner had handed over the bribe amount and the vehicle to his brother-in-law and instructed him to hide the money, showing deliberate non-cooperation with the investigation.

The counsel highlighted that the petitioner had no legitimate reason to abscond and that custodial interrogation was necessary to prevent tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, Sri K. Surender, is alleged to have demanded Rs.1,00,000/- and accepted Rs. 50,000/- from a complainant in exchange for showing official favour. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel contended that there are contem