Ranjith Kumar Muvva Vs The State of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.11050 of 2025

ORAL ORDER:

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner who is arrayed as accused in Crime No.1274 of 2024 of Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

¶5

The brief facts of the case are that on 27.12.2024 L.W.1 lodged a complaint stating that in May 2020 she came into contact with Muvva Ranjit Kumar through an online app. He introduced himself as a divorcee and NRI who had relocated from the USA to Hyderabad to start a business. They met in September 2020, developed a friendship, and he proposed marriage. On 27.05.2021, he persuaded her to pledge gold worth Rs.20 lakhs, partly in her name and partly in his, for his business. He failed to repay the loan, and the liability was later transferred fully to her name. After his mother’s death in June 2021, he absconded while the loan amount grew to Rs.30 lakhs. In July 2024, he introduced her to one Pavani Raghuram, presented as his cousin, who gave a blank cheque

¶6

2

¶7

SKS,J Crl.P.No.11050 of 2025

¶8

as assurance, but the account was already closed. Later, Ranjit issued another cheque for Rs.30 lakhs on 04.09.2024, which also bounced due to insufficient funds. Since November 2024, he has been absconding and unreachable. Pavani later admitted she was only a friend, not his cousin, and also claimed to be cheated.

¶9

Heard Sri M. Sreekanth, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent – State.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the de facto complainant had earlier lodged a report with the same allegations for the offences under Sections 420 and 417 IPC, and that the present complaint is an improvement by adding the offence under Section 376(1) IPC. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in jail since 09.07.2025 and that the material part of the investigation has been completed. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

¶11

3

¶12

SKS,J Crl.P.No.11050 of 2025

¶13

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail stating that there were several financial transactions and the Investigating Officer still needs to collect the same. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

¶14

In light of the submissions made by both learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 09.07.2025. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed and 13 witnesses have been examined. Further, the de facto complainant had earlier lodged a report with the same allegations. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

¶15

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

¶16

ii. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every

¶17

4

¶18

SKS,J Crl.P.No.11050 of 2025

¶19

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.

¶20