K.Tejaram Murthy v. The State Of Telangana
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY .THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G SRI DEVI CRIMIN ALPETITION NO:7 2960F20 20 Between:
K.Teiaram N,4urthy, S/o K. Mohan Rao, Age 29 yrs, Occ Software Employee' R/o ii;",i"'N;.iil,'r'iisiitoor, ffii;i;ui';;; e-pirimeirts, church Main Road' Hall 3rd Stage, Bengaluru, Karnataka ...PETITIONERYACCUSEDNo"I AND The State of Telangana, Rep.by.its Public Prosecutor', High Court' Hyderabad' High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. through P'S, Banjara Hills' .,.RESPONDENT PetitionunderSection43BofCr.P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated in the lrilemorandum of Crounos of Criminal Petltio;, the High Court may be ple,ased io -gL.t A"ti.ipatory bail io the petitioner and direct the Police, Baniara Hills to !rrlrg" tLL p.ii|on"|. on nuir in tr," event of their arrest in cr.No.825/2020 on the file oiP.S.Banjara Hills in the interest of justice This Petition coming on for hearing'upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri VENUGOPAL JULAKANT|,AdvocateforthePetitionerandthePublicProsecutoronbehalfofthe Respondent No1.
The Court made the following: ORDER
HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMIN PETITION No.7296 OF 2020 ORDER:
This Criminal Petition, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., is frled by the petit ioner/accused, for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.825 of 2020 of P.S. Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, registered fbr the of-fences punishable uncler Sections 493 and 420 ol lPC. llcard lcan'rerl counsel lirr thc petitioner. thc learned Additionai Public Prosecutor representing the respondent- State and pentsed the record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and is in no way concemed with the alleged offences of cheating, torturing or molesting the de focto complainant. It is submitted that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen and is { prepared to abide by any condition that may be imposed in case of granting anticipatory bail. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the pe t itioner Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State opposed granting of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, stating that the petitioner/accused ls alleged to have tortured and molested lhe de.facto complainant and as per the contents of complaint, he is also having illegal affairs with many women.
As seen from the contents of the F.l.R., there are specihc grave allegations against the petitioner that he has molested lhe de.fitcto conrplainant.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offences, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
The Criminal Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the competent Court within a period of ten days from today and applies for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the said Court, in accordance with law. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closcd Sd/-CH.VE N KATESHWARLU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (t"
,TRUE COPY'
i SECTION OFFICER To,
1. The lll Additional chief Metropolitan N'4ag istrate, Hyderabad '
2. The Station House Officer' BanjaraHills Police Station ,Hyderabad' 3.TwoCCstoPublicProsecutor,HighCourtfortheStateofTelangana'at Hyderabad [OUT]
4. One CC to SRl. VENUGOPAL JULAKANTI Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CD Copies
HIGH COURT GSDJ DATED:1910112021
ORDER
,I \J^ CRLP.No.7296 of 2020 2 A.ll,!{ 2C21 u \\ r.
/ DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION 2o))