THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.9408 and 9424 of 2025

COMMON ORDER:

These Criminal Petitions are filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 3 in Crime No.99 of 2025 on the file of Ramgopalpet Police Station, Hyderabad District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 61 (2), 319 (2), 309 (4) and 49 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) wherein the petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 3.

2. Since both these criminal petitions are arising out of the same crime, this Court is disposing of both the criminal petitions by way of a common order.

3. The case of the prosecution is that LW-1 and LW-2 are friends and earned Rs.4,09,000/- through online trading and they approached accused No.4 to provide a bank account to withdraw a sum of Rs.3,95,000/, who in turn approached petitioner/accused No.1 who in turn arranged the bank account of petitioner/accused No.3 and accordingly, the said amount of Rs.3,95,000/- was transferred to the bank account of petitioner/accused No.3. On 26.06.2025, LW-1 and petitioner/accused No.1 withdrawn the money from Kotak Mahindra Bank and while they were proceeding on P.G.Road, accused No.2 intercepted them and posed as a police officer and stopped them. Thereafter, accused No.2 and petitioner/accused No.1 took the scooter and cash by leaving LW-1 at the scene and petitioner/accused No.1 distributed Rs.5,000/- each to accused Nos.2 to 4 and kept the remaining amount with him. Basing on the same, Crime No.99 of

2025 was registered.

4. Heard Mr.C. Sharan Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners in Crl.P.Nos.9408 of 2025 and 9424 of 2025 and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed the offence and they were falsely implicated in the above crime. It is further submitted that initially crime was registered against Irfan who is arrayed as accused No.2 and subsequently the petitioners were impleaded in the present crime. There are no allegations much less specific allegations against the petitioners to attract the ingredients under Section 309 (4) of BNS. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint or in the Remand Case Diary the entire allegations i.e., robbery was committed by accused No.2 only. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that accused Nos.2 and 4 were arrested and enlarged on bail and entire investigation is completed in this crime except filing of charge sheet. The petitioners are not having any criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners shall abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court, and they are ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, the petitioners may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

6. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners have committed grave offence. At the instance of accused No.4, petitioner/accused No.3 provided his bank account to the victims and used an amount of Rs.3,95,000/- belonging to de facto complainant by transferring to the account of petitioner/accused No.3 and after withdrawal of the said amount, at the instance of petitioner/accused No.3, petitioner/accused No.1 and accused No.2 committed robbery of the said amount. Ultimately, the victims suffered in the hands of the petitioners and other accused. It is a clear case of conspiracy and there are specific overt-acts against each of the petitioners. He further submitted that there are serious allegations against the petitioners and investigation is under progress and the petitioners are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. At this stage, if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, they will interfere with the investigation and influence the witnesses. Hence, pr