IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1562 OF 2026 DATE : 25.02.2026 Between :

Komaraju Anjan Kumar … Petitioner/A.5 And The State of Telangana, Through SHO P.S. EOW Cyberabad, Rep., by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, At Hyderabad … Respondent/Complainant : ORDER :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying this Court to grant bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.61 of 2025 of EOW (Cyber) Police Station, Cyberabad. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.5 in the said crime and the offences alleged against him are under Sections 316(2), 318 r/w.3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. The facts of the case are that on 02.09.2025 the complainant lodged a complaint before police stating that from August 2023 to August 2024, he worked as Chief Marketing Officer at Sri Nandhan Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., whose Managing Director is T. Vijaya Lakshmi (A.1). During his tenure, he collected investments from friends and relatives amounting to Rs.2.60 crores, with the assurance that plots would be registered in their names and interest would be paid on the investments. The company registered only four plots and failed to register the remaining plots despite repeated assurances. The accused persons provided only Memorandum of Understanding but did not fulfill their commitments regarding interest payments or plot registrations. As a result, the complainant alleged that the accused persons breached his trust and cheated him by collecting huge amounts. Based on the said complaint, case was registered against the accused for the above offences.

3. Heard Ravulapati Sreenivasa Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner he is innocent of the said allegations and he has no connection with the complaint. No specific overt acts have been attributed to him, and he has been falsely implicated. He is neither an employee of M/s. Sree Nandhan Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. nor involved in its business or transactions. The case record and police documents do not mention his role, and no incriminating material has been seized from him. He has not signed any MOUs or cheques, and no funds were deposited in his account. It is further submitted that there is no evidence linking him to the alleged offence. Other accused have already been granted bail, and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. The investigation is complete except for filing of the charge sheet. He further submitted that petitioner and his minor daughter, aged about 9 years, are diabetic patients, that his daughter requires his care due to her age and medical condition. His first wife passed away during Covid, and he has been taking care of his minor daughter since then. His second wife, who is Accused No.1, is living separately, and divorce proceedings are pending. Hence, prayed this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed bail and filed counter stating that the investigation revealed that A.1, and A.2, are directors of M/s. Srinandhan Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., and the company’s main object is to engage in real estate and related schemes. In March and May 2023, the complainant approached the company after seeing advertisements on social media, he was introduced to various investment plans by Chandrashekar, Sales Manager, and later to A.1, the Managing Director. At that time, petitioner herein along with A.6 to A.11, was present and, together with A.1, induced the complainant to invest. Believing their promises, the complainant and several others deposited large sums of money. The complainant alone t