##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3097 of 2026

DATE: 24.03.2026

BETWEEN:

Manda Srihari Babu

…..petitioner/accused No.24

And

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad and another

…..Respondent/complainant

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 are arrayed as accused No.24 in Crime No.86 of 2026 before the

2 SKS,J Crl.P.No.3097 of 2026

Sathupalli Police Station, Khammam District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338 read with 3(5) of BNS and Section 66-D of ITA-2000-

2008.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the de facto complainant was induced by some of the accused persons on the pretext of providing employment and business opportunities. In that process, the accused allegedly persuaded the complainant to open several bank accounts in ICICI Bank, HDFC Bank and IDBI Bank and collected the internet banking credentials, ATM cards and other account- related materials. Subsequently, the said bank accounts were allegedly misused by the accused persons for carrying out organized cyber fraud by receiving and transferring large sums of money obtained from victims through online scams. Upon coming to know about the alleged cyber fraud involving accused No.1 and others, the complainant verified his bank

accounts and noticed suspicious transactions.

3. Heard Sri S. Chandra Mohan Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M.

3 SKS,J Crl.P.No.3097 of 2026

Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

appearing on behalf of the respondent – State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no direct involvement in the alleged offences and that the allegations are based on assumptions and statements of co- accused without any independent or corroborative material linking the petitioner to the crime. He contended that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen, willing to cooperate with the investigation, and there is no necessity for custodial interrogation. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant pre-

arrest bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petitions contending that the investigation so far reveals that the accused persons were involved in an organized cyber fraud syndicate through which huge amounts of money were collected from unsuspecting victims by using mule bank accounts. He further submitted that the petitioner, being a bank employee, along with other accused persons allegedly opened several bank accounts without

4 SKS,J Crl.P.No.3097 of 2026

proper verification of account holders and collected internet banking credentials, which were later handed over to the main accused for committing cyber fraud. The investigation further discloses that the accused persons received commissions for opening such accounts. He contended that the petitioner are shown as an absconding accused and their custodial interrogation is required to trace the money trail, identify additional mule accounts and ascertain the full extent of the conspiracy. At this stage, granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner does not arise. Therefore, he prayed the Court to

dismiss this Criminal Petition.

6. In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it prima facie appears that the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.24, is alleged to have played a role in facilitating the opening of multiple bank accounts without proper due diligence and in collecting internet banking credentials and related materials, which were subsequently used by the main ac