Pasupuleti Sai Vinod Kumar, v. The State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT

HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.17528 of 2025 DATE: 31.12.2025 Between:

Pasupuleti Sai Vinod Kumar .... Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

.... Respondent

O R D E R

This criminal petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioner/accused seeking enlargement on bail in connection with Crime No.1252 of 2025 of Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

- 2 - 2.

The brief facts of the case are that, on 01.11.2025, the de-facto complainant lodged a report with the police stating that she became acquainted with the petitioner in December 2024. During a period of depression, the petitioner consoled and supported her emotionally, and in June 2025 he expressed his love and intention to marry her, which she accepted. In July 2025, they entered into a physical relationship at various hotels. However, when she questioned him regarding marriage, he gradually avoided meeting her, refused to marry, and allegedly harassed, slapped, and threatened her on multiple occasions. On 15.10.2025, when she complained, the petitioner sent her a message stating that he did not wish to continue the relationship and subsequently blocked her on social media. Consequently, the complainant requested the police to take necessary action, and based on her complaint, a case was registered for the alleged offence.

3.

Heard Sri Sarat Ram Suryadevara, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 4.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations and has been falsely implicated in the case and that the relationship between the

- 3 - petitioner and the de‐facto complainant was consensual, and therefore, the offence alleged is not applicable to the petitioner. He further contended that the de‐facto complainant is in the habit of lodging complaints against various persons and had earlier lodged a report before the police on 09.05.2025 vide Crime No.929 of 2025. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 22.11.2025 and that the crucial part of the investigation has already been completed. Hence, prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner.

5.

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, contending that the allegations against the petitioner are heinous in nature and the investigation is still ongoing. Therefore, prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition. 6.

In light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon a perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 22.11.2025. As per the remand case diary, prosecution witnesses LWs.1 to 10, including the investigating authority, have already been examined. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the stage of investigation, the relationship between the parties and the

- 4 - duration of incarceration, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner‐accused, subject to the following conditions: i.

The petitioner-accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XIII Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at Rajendranagar.

ii.

The petitioner-accused shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) week or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

iii.

The petitioner-accused shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

7.

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 31.12.2025 SS

- 5 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 17528 OF 2025 DATE: 31.12.2025 SS