: ORDER :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest in connection with FIR No.472 of 2025 of Maheshwaram Police Station, Ranga Reddy District. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 r/w.34 of Indian Penal Code.

2. The facts of the case are that de facto complainant lodged a complaint before police on 21.12.2025 stating that he is the owner and possessor of Plot No.556, admeasuring 200 square yards, situated at Airport Town, Toopra Khurd Revenue Village and Gram Panchayat, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same from P. Geetha Madhuri under registered Sale Deed No. 3285 of 2019 dated 11.02.2019 for a sale consideration of Rs.3,00,000/-. It is alleged that when he intended to sell the plot due to financial difficulties, he came to know that the said plot had been fraudulently sold by impersonation in favour of T. Pawan Kalyan under registered Sale Deed No. 10246 of 2023 dated 20.06.2023. Thereafter, the same plot was again sold in favour of A.2 under Document No.15235 of 2023 dated 13.09.2023, and subsequently A.2 sold the plot to A.3 under Document No.19419 of 2023 dated 25.11.2023. The complainant alleged that he never sold the plot to anyone and never authorized any person to use his Aadhaar card or photograph, and therefore requested the police to take necessary action against the accused. Basing on the said complaint police registered the case against the accused for the said offences.

3. Heard Sri P. Ramulu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent - State.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case by the de facto complainant only to harass them. It is contended that a plain reading of the complaint would show that the allegations and the alleged incident are inherently improbable and not believable. It is further contended that after registration of the FIR, the respondent police falsely shown the petitioners as A.1 and A.2 in the remand diary, allegedly on the basis of the confession statements of A.3 and A.4. The petitioners apprehend arrest as the police are making enquiries regarding their whereabouts, and in the event of arrest, they would suffer severe stigma in society. The learned counsel further submitted that the complaint does not prima facie disclose any offence against the petitioners and they are ready to furnish suitable sureties and abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail contending that the allegations against the petitioners are serious in nature as they have forged and the signature of the complainant and also fabricated the documents. As such, petitioners are not entitled to bail and prayed to dismiss this petition.

6. Considering the submissions made by both sides and the material available on record, the petitioners herein are arrayed as A.1 and A.2. The allegations against them are that they obtained the original sale deed bearing Document No.3285 of 2019, prepared a forged sale deed, and presented the same before the Sub-Registrar Office by falsely stating that the original document belonging to Goda Ravi Babu was not available. It is further alleged that they produced a certified copy of the said document and forged his signature. The aforesaid allegations prima facie indicate the involvement of petitioners in fabrication and forgery of documents. Having regard to the gravity and seriousness of the allegations, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage, as such, the same is liable to be dismissed.

7. Ac