The Hon’ble Sri Justice J.Sreenivas Rao Criminal Petition No.8173 of 2025

Order

:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused in Crime No.114 of 2025 of Tadvai Police Station, Mulugu District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 318(4) and 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

2. Heard Ms. Sarampally Mrudula, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent/State.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 29.01.2025 at about 14:00 hours, the complainant filed a complaint stating that in the year 2021, she fell in love with the petitioner, who is the son of her maternal uncle, and they used to converse with each other through mobile phones and on 29.01.2025, the petitioner asked her to come to forest beside their fields and when she went there, the petitioner assured that he would marry her and participated in sexual intercourse and after few days, when she became pregnant, the complainant asked her to terminate the pregnancy and refused to marry her and when the petitioner was confronted before the village elders, he accepted his guilt and took the complainant to his house and that night he again had sexual intercourse with her and on the next day morning, the petitioner left the complainant at her parents’ house and again refused to marry her. Basing on the said complaint, the aforesaid crime was registered against the petitioner/accused for the aforesaid offences.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime and even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the petitioner and complainant are known to each other since 2021. He further submits that the petitioner never promised the complainant that he would marry her and the physical relationship between them was consensual and hence, the ingredients of Section 69 of BNS are not attracted against the petitioner and the petitioner is doing photography and eking out his livelihood and he has no criminal antecedents and prays to grant 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. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has committed grave offence and there are specific allegations against the petitioner that on the false promise of marriage, he developed physical relationship with the complainant and made her pregnant and refused to marry her and the investigation is under progress and hence, the petitioner is not entitled for anticipatory bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that specific allegations are levelled against the petitioner/accused that on the false promise of marriage, the petitioner developed physical relationship with the complainant and made her pregnant and later refused to marry her. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the investigation is at the threshold 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, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to him.

8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand closed.

___________________ J.SREENIVAS RAO, J Date: 09.07.2025

LUR