The Hon’ble Sri Justice J.Sreenivas Rao Criminal Petition No.8699 of 2025

Order

:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused No.2 in Crime No.1579 of 2024 of Hayathnagar Police Station, Rachakonda, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 338, 336(3) and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

2. The case of prosecution in brief is that on 23.12.2024 at about 20:00 hours, the complainant lodged a complaint, stating that himself and his son-in-law approached the mediators i.e., accused Nos.14 and 15 in the aforesaid crime for purchase of a plot and they showed a plot at Gandicheruvu Service Road, Koheda Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, for an amount of Rs.56 lakhs and the complainant and his son- in-law paid the said amount in four installments and an agreement of sale was executed in their favour, but later he came to know through one Mr. Vinod Raju Saksena that he is the actual owner of the said plot and the agreement holders forged the document and sold the plot to the complainant and his son-in-law. Basing on the said complaint, the present crime was registered against the petitioner/accused No.2 and other accused for the aforesaid offences.

3. Heard Mr. Mullangi Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.2 and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that even according to the complaint, there is no allegation levelled against the petitioner and his name has also not been mentioned therein, but however, basing on the confession statement made by other accused, the petitioner was arraigned as accused No.2 in the complaint. He further submits that the petitioner has not forged or created any document nor has he received any sale consideration from the complainant and hence, the ingredients of Sections 338 of BNS are not attracted against the petitioner and all other offences levelled against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment upto seven years only. He prays that the petitioner be granted anticipatory bail as he is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by the conditions as may be imposed by this Court.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has committed grave offence and specific allegation is made in the complaint that he created forged document and sold the plot by receiving Rs.56 lakhs from the complainant although the plot does not belong to him. He further submits that the preliminary investigation revealed that the petitioner along with accused No.1 committed the offence and the investigation is under progress and at this stage, if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, he may tamper with the evidence and influence the witnesses and hence, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioner and other accused created forged document in respect of plot No.222 covered by Survey Nos.153/2, 154, 168 to 170 and 176/1 situated at Gandi Cheruvu Road, Koheda Village of Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and alienated the same to the complainant by receiving a huge amount of Rs.56 lakhs from him without having any semblance of right thereon. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the investigation is under progress and the chargesheet has not yet been filed.

7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the gravity of offence alleged against the petitioner/accused No.2, this Co