Allowed

Siddiraju Raja v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Sept 2026CRLP/14029/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail petition of an accused framed under sections 318, 336, and 338 of the BNS, relying on the change of circumstances and extensive investigation, subject to personal bond and specific attendance conditions.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was enlarged on bail subject to executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, attending the police station weekly for investigation, and complying with statutory bail condit

Siddiraju Raja Vs The State of Telangana — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO

¶3

CRIMINAL PETITION No.14029 of 2026

¶4

(CNR No. HBHC010587942026)

¶5

DATED: 15^th SEPTEMBER, 2026

¶6

Between:

¶7

Siddiraju Raja

¶8

... Petitioner-Accused And

¶9

The State of Telangana

¶10

... Respondent-Complainant

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 483 of the

¶13

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused in connection with Crime No.857 of 2026 of P.S. Basheerabad, Cyberabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner-accused are under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Act, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

¶14

2. Heard Mr.K.Ramakrishna Chowdary, learned counsel

¶15

for petitioner-accused and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent - State.

¶16

¶17

Crl.P.No.14029 of 2026

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that predominantly the entire case of the prosecution rests upon the documentary and electronic evidence. The allegation of the prosecution is that petitioner-accused has received a commission of Rs.5,000/- from each of the alleged beneficiary is also not stated in the remand report. The remand report itself records the property stolen as nil and property received as nil. Earlier bail application filed by the petitioner-accused came to be dismissed on 30.07.2026. Petitioner-accused is in jail since 25.06.2026 and substantial portion of investigation

¶19

is completed and he relied on the decision in the case of Kalyan Chandra Sarkar etc., Vs. Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav and another¹ and prayed to enlarge the petitioneraccused on bail.

¶20

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the role played by the petitioner-accused is depicted in the remand case diary.

¶21

Dr.M.Umashankar of Surekha Multispecialty Hospital, Kompally, Hyderabad has lodged a complaint before PET Basheerabad police station on 18.06.2026 about the fraud,

¶22

1 AIR 2005 SC 921

¶23

¶24

Crl.P.No.14029 of 2026

¶25

forgery and submission of false insurance claims. Basing on which FIR came to be registered against the petitioneraccused.

¶26

Petitioner-accused has filed bail petition vide Crl.P.No.11694 of 2026 which came to be dismissed vide order dated 30.07.2026 with an observation that prosecution has to seize the documents from the possession of the petitioneraccused.

¶27

Petitioner-accused is in judicial custody since

¶28

25.06.2026, as on date it is nearly coming up to 80 days.

¶29

In Kalyan Chandra Sarkar, Three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court observed that in change in the facts, successive bail applications can be filed on change of circumstances.

¶30

As stated supra, petitioner-accused is in judicial custody for almost 80 days. The respondent has altogether examined 10 witnesses in support of the case, it appears that major portion of the investigation is completed. Hence, petitioner-accused is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶31

¶32

Crl.P.No.14029 of 2026

¶33

In the result, petition is allowed against petitioner-

¶34

accused subject to the following conditions:

¶35

i. The petitioner- accused shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two local sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned X Addl. Judicial First Class magistrate, at Medchal.

¶36

ii. The petitioner- accused shall appear before the concerned SHO in between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., on every Sunday and Wednesday for a period of eight (8) weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation and thereafter, as and when required.

¶37