Dismissed¶29

Smt. Mokenapally Amala v. The State of Telangana

Anticipatory bail – S.482 BNSS

Telangana HC20 Aug 2025CRLP/9868/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court, Criminal Petition No.9868 of 2025, decided 20/08/2025 by K. Sujana, J.: anticipatory bail under S.482 BNSS sought by wife/Accused No.1 in Crime No.206/2025 of P.S. Allapur, Cyberabad for offences under Sections 108 r/w 3(5) BNS arising from her husband's suicide under a running train allegedly caused by her illicit relationship with A.2 and harassment; bail refused on account of severity of the offence; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Considering the submissions of both counsel, the material on record, the allegations that the petitioner had an illegal relationship with A.2 and that the harassment by the petitioner and A.2 led the deceased to commit suicide, and the severity of the offence, the petitioner is not entitled to bail. ¶28

Smt. Mokenapally Amala Vs The State of Telangana — Anticipatory Bail | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁸⁵¹

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTIETH^{DAY OF AUGUST} IWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE^{K. SUJANA}

¶6

CRIMINAL PETIT^{loN NO: 9868OF 2025}

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. trilokenapally Amala,^{W/o.tvlokenapq!.lyRajashekhar, Aged 33 years, OccDaily} wages, R/o.H.No. 3-4, Kasipet,^{Adilabad,,",rnnrnr...rrTlTIONERyACCUSED} No.1

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana,^{ThroughS H O., P-S. Allapur, Cyberabad,Rep by its} Public Prosecutor, High^{Court at Hyderabad}

¶11

...RESpoNDENT/CoMpLAtNANT

¶12

Petition under section⁴⁸² of^{cr.P.cpraying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminalPetition,the Highcourtmay} be pleased to enlarge^{the Petitioner/AccusedNo. t hereinon Anticipatorybail in} the event of his^{airest in Crime No.206/2025, dated25.04.2025of the PS} Allapur, Cyberabad,^{for the offences under sec 108,r/w 3(5)BNSS'}

¶13

This Petition coming^{on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandumof} Grounds of criminal^{Petition and upon hearingthe arguments of Ms.ch.} Shravani, learned^{counsel appearing sri N.Srinivas.Advocate for the Petitioner} and sri syed Yasar^{lvlamoon,Additronal Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the} Respondent.

¶14

The Court made the^{following:ORDER}

¶15

',:1{-'€'+{!-z

¶16

THE HONOURABLE SMT.^{JUSTICEK. S]J TANA}

¶17

cRIMINAL PETITION No.9868 OF^{2{'i 5}

¶18

ORDER:

¶19

This r.riminaI petilion is hlcd under Sectiolr^{''; 2 oi' Bhirratiya} Nagarik Surakshzr Sanhita, 2023 (Ior short^{IrNSS') byrhe} petitioner/A. i seeking alLicipatory bail in conncr^{t on \'ith Crime} No.2O6 of 2025 ol Allappur Policc Station,^{Cyberatr l. 'lheollences} allcgcd against the petitioner arc nndt'r Sections^{t)8 r/u'.3(5) ol} Rlraraliva Nvava Sanhita,2023 (for short^'BNS').

¶20

'2. 'lhe facts of thc casc arc that on 25.04 . ( 25 the dcfacto complainant lodged a complaint stating that thr^{cr:c'rrsedrt'asa} native ol Kzr sipet village of Adilabad District anrl^{lt s nl.rrrlagewas} pcrformed u,irh the petitioner hcrcin 15 ycars lrr:1< and livccl in Hyderabad for their livelihood in a rented houst'^a I^Bor;rbanda ald that thc).' have a son. The petitioner hcrein u: ;^{hzLving illegal} inlimacy u,ith onc muslim person by name Ail:r,ⁿ ho is A.2 and due to thc said illegal intimacv, there were^{f ', quer} rt^qu:rrrels betwcen the couple. In this regard, they also ap rtroar:hed^police :urd elders even thereafter, the petitioner her,:ir corttinued her ille gal relationship. Vexed^\t ith the attitude lI^pet itioner, her husband committcd suicide by lalling under a r I tning train who

¶21

¶22

died on the spot. The complainant herein is the brother of deceased and requcsted the police to take action against the accu sed.

¶23

Heard Ms. Ch. Shravani, lea,rned counsel appearing for Sri N.Snnivas, learned counsel for the petitioner arrd Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additionzrl Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.

¶24

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner herein is A. 1, she is al innocent person, that she is already undergoing immense hardship and Ioss in her^personal life and she has to take czrre of her minor child, ald she is the only bread winner of her family. This complaint is ltled only with a malahde intentron with a delay of 16 days from lhe date of alleged incident which raises serious doubt on the veracity of allegations. There are civil disputes between the^petitioner and complainalt and oniy to settle the same, the^present complaint is ftled. Hence, requested this Court to grant alticipatory bail to the^petitioner. 5. On the other hand learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail stating that there are serious allegations against the petitioner. The petitioner herein harassed Lhe deceased physically and mentally ald due to un-bearable harassment, he committed

¶25

:r.:: I .+

¶26

¶27

suicide. As such, requested this Court^{torljsr issthis bail} application

¶28

6 Considering the submissions made by^{boLl'ri I : connsel and} the matcrial on record, the allegations against^{tl i;petitioneris} that she had illegal relationship with A.2 and^{ct e to the said} relationsl.rip, and harassment made Lry the^{petitior€I and A 2, the} rleceascd committcd suicide. Considering the^{s:verity of the} offence. the petitioner is not entitled for bail.

¶29