Gorla Raghavendra @ Nani Vs The State of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.2523 of 2025

ORAL ORDER:

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.24 of 2025 of Bhongir Town Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

¶5

The brief facts of the case are that on 12.01.2025, at 10:30 PM, Smt. Anthati Padma submitted a petition stating that earlier that day, at around 9:30 PM, her son, Arthati Naresh, was attacked by a group of individuals, including Gorre Raghavendra Yadav, Elimineti Mahender Reddy, and others, who arrived at their residence armed with sticks, knives, and chili powder. They allegedly assaulted her son, injuring him on the head and forehead, and also attacked her, causing her to fall. The group also damaged their car's windows and attempted to harm her other son.

¶6

Heard Sri Pulimamidi Shashidhar Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri

¶7

2

¶8

SKS,J Crl.P.No.2523 of 2025

¶9

Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and law-abiding citizens, residing in Bhongir Town of Yadadri-Bhongir District and that the allegations against them are false, baseless, and without evidence. He further submitted that the petitioners have been in custody for over a month, since 16.01.2025, with no substantial progress in the investigation. The FIR contains contradictions and missing information, raising doubts about its accuracy. Additional sections were incorporated into the case based on alleged confessions, which are inadmissible as evidence. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioners by allowing this criminal petition.

¶11

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are serious in nature and that there are 5 other cases are pending against the petitioners. Therefore, at this stage, granting of bail to the petitioners does not arise. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

¶12

3

¶13

SKS,J Crl.P.No.2523 of 2025

¶14

After considering the submissions made by both learned

¶15

counsel and reviewing the material available on record, it appears that the petitioners have been in jail since January 16, 2025. Although there are pending cases against the petitioners, learned counsel for the petitioners states that these cases have been settled through the Lok Adalat. Given that the material aspects of the investigation are completed, the injuries received by the victim are simple in nature, and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court deems it fit and proper to grant bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:

¶16

i. The petitioners 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 Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bhongir.

¶17

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

¶18

4

¶19

SKS,J Crl.P.No.2523 of 2025

¶20

every Monday for a period of eight (8)

¶21

weeks, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

¶22

iii. The petitioners shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.