Syed Saleem Pasha, Vs The State through P.S. Bandlaguda, Hyd.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA II AT HYDERABAD

¶2

MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 16219 OF 2025

¶6

Between:

¶7

Syed Saleem Pasha, S/o. Syed Chand Pasha, Aged about 43 Yrs, Occ. Private Job, R/o. Near: Masjid E Bardaan Mustafa Hills, [Mohammed Nagar, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad.

¶8

... Petitioner/Accused

¶9

AND

¶10

The State throug h P.S. Bandlaguda, Hyd., Rep by Public Prosecutor High Court, Hyderabad

¶11

.. RespondenUComplai nant

¶12

Petition under Section 438 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioner on bail in connection with SCPCS No. 375 of 2025 on the file of the Xll Addt. Sessions Judge at Hyderabad P.S. Bandlaguda Hyderabad.

¶13

t

¶14

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon . hearing the arguments of IVIr MD FASEEHUDDIN SOHEB, AdVOCAIE fOr thE PEtitiONEr ANd Mr D. ARUN KUMAR, the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the sole Respondent.

¶15

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶16

a

¶17

,7

¶18

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FOR TIIE STATE OF TELANGAI{A}

¶19

AT I{YDERABAI)

¶20

T'HE HONOURABLE^{SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA}

¶21

CRIMINAL PETITION^{No. L6219 of 2ol25}

DATE: 29.L2.2O25

BETWEEN

Syed SeLleem Pasha

....petitioner/ accused

¶26

And

¶27

The Ste.te of Telangana,

¶28

Rep. by Public Prosecutor,

¶29

High Court for the^{State of Telangana,}

¶30

at Hydt:rabad.

¶31

Respondent/ comPlainant

¶32

ORDER

¶33

,llhis criminal Petition is filed praying this court to enlargt: the^{petitioneron bail who is arrayed as accused in} scPCS, No.375 0f 2025^{0n the file of the learnedXII Additional} Sessions Judge, Hyderabad,^{registered for theoffence}

¶34

-\ I

¶35

7

¶36

Crl.P.IIo. .^{16219 of} sKs'J^2o25

¶37

punishable^{under sections6a(2X0(m)of BNS and Section5(1)} read with 6^{of POCSOAct, 2Ol2'}

¶38

2.Thebrieffactsofthecasearethatthepetitionerwas arrayed as^{an accused inCrime No'233 of2015 of} BandlagudaPoliceStationfort}reallegedoffencesunder Section 6a(2)(f)(m)^{of the BNS and Sections 5(1) read with 6 of} the POCSO^{Act, based on a complaint given by the minor} victimgirlallegingsexualabusebyherfatheroveraperiodof several^{years. It was statedthat after investigation, the police} altered the^{sectionsof law, arrested the petitioneron} 13.07.2025^{and filed a chargesheet' which was taken on file} asSCPCsNo.3T5of2o2l.andwaspendingtrialbeforethe Sessions^Court.

¶39

Heard Mohd.^{Faseehuddin, learnedcounsel appearing} on behalf 'of^{the petitioner as well as Sri D' Arun Kumar'} learnedAdditionalPublicProsecutorappearingonbehalfof the resPondent -^State'

¶40

¶41

4.Learnedcounselforthepetitionersubmittedthatthe petitioner was^{falselyimplicated and deniedthe allegationsas}

¶42

+4"s-'

¶43

3

¶44

sKs,J Crl.P.I{o. 162^{L9 of 2ol25}

¶45

\

¶46

tI

¶47

baseless and that the investigation was completed arrd no further ,:ustodial interrogation was required, that the medical report clid not collect any conclusive evidence due to the alleged incident being old, and that the petitioner had been in judicial custody since July 2025. He contended that the petitioner was the sole breadwinner of his family, the trial would turke considerable time. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition.

¶48

On the other hand, learned Additional Fublic Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitionr-'r stating that the allegations leveled against the petitionr:r are serious and heinous in nature. Further, the investigrrtion was not yet completed. At this stage, granting of bail to the petitioner does not arise. Thbrefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

¶49

Ir: the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon a careful perusal of the material available on record, it prima facie appears that the allegations against the petitioner disclose grave and serious offences

^--.-n----*#.-j

I

4

{,'

sKsd, Crl.P.Ito. 162 t9 of 20,25

¶55

involving sexual abuse of a minor, attracting stringent provisions of the POCSO Act. Further, the petitioner is the father of the victim. Considering the nature and gravity of the accusations, the stage of the proceedings, and the statutory presumption operating against the accused under the POCSO Act, this Court is not inctined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, and accordingly, the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶56

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.

¶57

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶58

closed.

¶59

\

¶60

SD'. A.^JAYASREF ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR L7./

/TRUE^COPY//

SECTION^OFFICER

a

To,

The^{XllAdditionalSessions Judge at Hyderab-ad} 2. The^{Chief l'ii"i'fMagistrate' Nampally' Hyderabad'} 3. The^{Stationlioli"'ofr} ""r,^{B;;i;ild'a' potice.station, Hvderabad'} 4. Two^{CCs to the pubtic pro""lrior, iign Court ioi t'" Siate of Telangana' at} HyJeraOaO'tOUTl --. ..r^nrr.r e/1uEEr Ar 5. one^{cc t" il;"1il6 FASEEHUDDINsoHEB''advocate [oPUC]} 6. The^{SuperinienO"ni' Cn"nchalguda'Central Prison'} 7. Two CD^CoPies Rc/Sa

W

/

/

HIGH COURT

DATED: 12911212025

ORDER