Allowed

B. Shivaji v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC30 Jan 2025CRLP/875/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail sought by accused No.2 in a case of alleged misappropriation of about 1879.560 MTs of paddy supplied for custom milling under an agreement with the Civil Supplies Corporation. The court noted material investigation was completed and prior writ proceedings on storage permission, and granted anticipatory bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; petitioner to surrender within two weeks and be released on Rs.25,000 personal bond with two sureties, plus weekly appearances for eight weeks or till charge sheet.

B. Shivaji Vs The State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.875 of 2025

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for granting of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/accused No.2 in Crime No.10 of 2025 on the file of the Wanaparthy Rural Police Station, Wanaparthy.

¶5

The brief facts of the case are that the de-facto complainant, who is the Deputy Tahsildhar, Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Mahabubnagar, lodged complaint before the Wanaparthy Rural Police, Wanaparthy District against the accused persons stating that the accused persons has entered into written agreement with Telangana Civil Supplies Corporation wherein it is stated that the Corporation supplies its own stocks of paddy to the accused persons and he shall supply the rice back to the Corporation for the purpose of Public Distribution System. It is stated that the petitioner entered into an agreement with the Civil Supplies Corporation in the year 2024-25 (Kharif season) for supply of rice to the Corporation. Later, the Custom Milling

¶6

¶7

SKS,J Crl.P.No.875 of 2025

¶8

Paddy has been issued to the accused persons i.e., Sri Anjaneya Traders, Wanaparthy. The de-facto complainant has conducted inspection of the mill on 09.01.2025 and after completion of inspection, they noticed that approximately 1879.560 MTs of paddy for the 2024-25 (Kharif season) was misappropriated. Hence, a case was registered vide Crime No.10 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5) and 318(3) of the BNS.

¶9

Heard Sri K.Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner firstly submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he is no way concerned with the alleged offences. He secondly submitted that though there is no corroborative evidence, the petitioner was implicated in the present case with false and fabricated allegations. He thirdly submitted that this Court in W.P.No.1916 of 2025 vide order dated 24.01.2025, directed the authorities to consider the fresh petition filed by the petitioner seeking permission to store the stock. He lastly submitted that the petitioner is

¶11

¶12

SKS,J Crl.P.No.875 of 2025

¶13

resident of Wanaparthy, with movable and immovable properties, and is willing to furnish sureties as directed. Hence, he prayed the Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶14

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that that there is misappropriation of paddy approximately 1879.560 MTs and the investigation is not yet completed, therefore, granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner, at this stage, does not arise. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

¶15

Having regard to the submissions made by both the parties and a perusal of the material placed on record, prima facie, it is apparent that though it is alleged that the petitioner stored the paddy in another rice mill without prior permission, this Court vide orders dated 24.01.2025 in W.P.No.1916 of 2025 directed the authorities to consider the fresh petition filed by the petitioner seeking permission to store the stock in another place as the allotment exceeded its storage capacity. It is pertinent to note that material part of the investigation is completed. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances

¶16

¶17

SKS,J Crl.P.No.875 of 2025

¶18

of the case, this Court is of the considered view that it is a fit case for granting of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Accordingly, this petition is allowed granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶20

i. The petitioner shall surrender before the Station House Officer of Wanaparthy Rural Police Station, Wanaparthy District, within two weeks from today, and on such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release him on bail on executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- with two sureties, for the like sum each.

¶21

ii. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Station House Officer on every Monday between 9:00 A.M. to 10 P.M., for a period of eight (08) weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier.

¶22

¶23

SKS,J Crl.P.No.875 of 2025

¶24

iii. The petitioner shall abide by the other conditions stipulated in Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.

¶25

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

closed.

K. SUJANA, J

Date: 30.01.2025 gms

SKS,J Crl.P.No.875 of 2025

¶31

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶32

CRIMINAL PETITION No.875 of 2025

¶33

Date: 30.01.2025

¶34

gms

B. Shivaji v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B. Shivaji v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yelamalla Sathish Vs The State of Telangana

Sanapala Praveen @ Abhinav @ Chinna Vs The State of Telangana

Bairi Laxmi Narsaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Nayine Bhujanga Rao Vs The State of Telangana

C. Venu Vs The State of Telangana

Ganesh R, Vs The State of Telangana.