Usham Sathish Vs The State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2025)

Usham Sathish Vs The State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2025)

[³³⁰³ ]

IN THE HIGH^{COURTFOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

WEDNESDAY,^{THE NINTH DAYOF JULY} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY FIVE}

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICEJ SREENIVAS RAO}

CRIMINA^{L PETITIONNO:8't73 0F 2025}

Between:

Usham sathish,^{s/ o Narsaiah, Aged about 29 years, occuPhotographer,. R/o} ;:'ti;.' d^{:' 4d;' v"J,rpffviliJg"l-C";gupurvillase' Tadvai Mandal'Mulugu} District

... Petitioner/Accused

AND

The State^{of Telangana,,Repby its Public Prosecutor' High Court of} Telangana at^HYderabad

...Respondent

Petition under^{Section 482 of BNSS prayLng that in the circumstances} stated in^{the Memorandr.'iiOrornO. of Criminal'Petition,the High Court.may. be} oleasedtoenlargethePetit.roneronbailintheeventofhisarrestinCrimeNo.l,l4 :ffi;"5;;il'"nioitzozis^{registeredbv P S Tadvai' Mulugu District on anv} condition^{as this Court ."V alZrnlitand'properin the present circumstancesof} the case

This Petition^{coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memoran} dum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition anduPon} hearing the^arguments of Sri SARAMPALLY MRUDULA,^{Advocatefor the} Petitioner and^{Mr. SYed} Yasar dditional^{Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent} Mamoon, the^A

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

The Hon'blc S r1 us ttce feeruvAS a CriminalPetitionNo.8 173 of2025

Order

This Criminal petition is filed under Section 4g2 of rhe Bharatiya Nagarika Suralsha Sanhira, 2a1/l $orshon, ,BNSS) seeking anticrparory bail to the petitioner/accused in crime No.114 o{ 2025 of Tailvai police Station, I\4ulugu District, registered for the offences punishable under Sectioru 31g(2), 318(a) and 69 of the Bharatila Nyaya Sanhit ha, 2023 (for shon 'BNS).

Heard IA. Sarampally Mrudula, leamed counsel for the petitioner/accused and Mr. Syed yasar Mamoon, Ieamed Additional Public prosecuror appearing for the respondent/State.

The case of the prosecurion rs that on 29.0I.2025 at about 14:00 hours, the complainant filed a complaint stating that in the lear 2021, she fell in love with the pedtioner, who is the son of her materrral uncle, and they used to convene with

1

I I

:.i:

each other^{through mobile phones and on 29'0l'2025'the} petitioner^{asked her to come to forest beside their fieldsand} when she^{went there, the petitioner assured that he would} marry her^{and participated in sexualintercourse and after few} da1a,^{when she became} Pregnant,^{the complainant asked her to} terminate^{the pregnancyand refused to marry her and when} the petitioner^{was confronted before the village elders'he} accepted^{his guih and took the complainant to his houseand} that night^{he again had sexual intercoursewith her and on the} next day^{moming,the petitionerleft the complainantat her} parents'^{houseand again refused to marrf her'Basing on the} said complaint,^{the aforesaid crime was registeredagainst the} petitioner/^{accused for the aforesaidoffences'}

Learned^{coursel for the petitioner/accused submits that} the petitioner^{has not commitedan)'offence and he has been} falsely^{implicated in the aforesaidcrime and even accordingto} the allegations^{made in the complaint' the petitionerand} complainant^{are known to each other since 2021'He further}

I

t t

:i-:;: !i-

3

submits that the peririoner never promised the complainant rhat he would marry. her and the phpical relatioruhip berween them was coruensual and hence, the ingredients of Section 69 of BNS are not anracred against rhe peririoner and the peritioner is doing photography and eking our his livelihood and he has no cnminal antecedents and prap to granr anticipatory bail as he is reacli, and wi[ing ro cooperare with the im.estigarion and abicle by the conditions as maybe imposed bythis (bLut. 5. Per contra, learned Additional public prosecutor submirs that the peririoner has committed grave offence and there are specific allegations against rhe petitioner that on the false promise of mar-riage, he developed phpical relationship wrth the complainant and made her pregnant and refused to marry her and the investigation is under progress and hence, the petitioner is nor entitled for anticipatory bail.

Flaving considered the rival submissions made by leamed counsel for the pafiies and on perusal of the matedal avai]able on record, it reveals that specific allegations are levelled against the

4

petrtroter/^{tccused that on the false promiseof marriage'the} petitioner^{developedphpicalrelationshipwlth the complainant} and made^{her pregnantand later refused to marrl' her' Even} according^{to the learnedAdditionalPublic Prosecutor' the} investigation^{is at the threshold and the chargesheet has not yet}

been^filed.

7 Flavrng^{regardto the facts and circumstancesof the case} and the^{gravity of offence alleged against the petitioner'/accused'} this C-oun^{is not inclinedto grant bail to him'}

the^{Criminal Petition} rS dismissed. 8. AccordinglY, As a^{sequel, miscellaneous petitions} '^{pending if arry' stand}

closed

I {

SD/5,ix#AIL?J+txx^',/ ,/TRUE^COPY" SECTION^OFFICER

To,

iur**+",8-"mts*;ffi*mh,H,Igd,iJ'di'i:'nn'n"" Hvderabad [OU^ll

o. trfuo^CDCoPies

SM/PSL T/I

I i i i I i

i I

i I I I I I i i ! ; I I I

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0gtOT1ZO}S

ORDER

CRLP.No.8173 of 2O2S

,.,,J61HF 5
h )4-
1'< t
/.'
l, :) (1 '
1..) 03 sEP zffi i
\z'l ), ('
,). - ,
..

DISMISSING THE CRTMINAL PETITION

(
'*-
2' i