Allowed

Devaraya Nithin v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Sept 2026CRLP/14109/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a Criminal Petition for anticipatory bail. The petitioner was accused of instigation in a case resulting in suicide. Balancing investigation needsagainst personal liberty, the Court granted bail subject to conditions including surrender, cooperation, and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to conditions: surrender by 24.09.2026, payment of Rs.25,000 bond with two sureties, availability for investigation, and prohibition from influencing witnesses.

Devaraya Nithin Vs The State of Telangana — Anticipatory Bail | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶3

CRIMINAL PETITION No.14109 OF 2026

¶4

(CNR No. HBHC010592482026)

DATE: 08.09.2026

Between :

Devaraya Nithin

… Petitioner-accused No.1

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana

¶11

… Respondent

¶12

ORDER:

¶13

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’), seeking the relief of pre-arrest bail.

¶14

The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.31 of 2024 on the file of the Pochampally Police Station, Yadadri-Bhongir District, registered for the offence punishable under Section 108 read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’).

¶15

Heard Mr.Kandagatla Srinivasulu, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent -State.

¶16

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the deceased and the Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) were in a relationship for the past six

¶17

¶18

years. It is alleged that the CCL was also chatting with the petitioner, while the petitioner and the deceased were childhood friends. On 14.02.2024, when the deceased questioned the CCL with regard to her chatting with the petitioner, the CCL is alleged to have slapped him and stated that she did not love him. Vexed by the said incident, the deceased went to his house and brought petrol in a plastic bottle. Thereafter, having narrated the incident to his mother and grandmother, he went into a room, bolted the door from inside, poured petrol over himself, and set himself ablaze. Though he was rescued and shifted to the hospital for treatment, he succumbed to the burn injuries on 17.02.2024. Pursuant thereto, on the basis of the report lodged, the present crime came to be registered.

¶19

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has no manner of involvement in the alleged offence and that his name has figured in the crime only on the basis of the averments contained in the police report. It is further contended that, even if the allegations in the report are taken at their face value, there is no specific overt act, instigation, or positive act attributable to the petitioner in any of the alleged occurrences. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. It is, therefore, prayed that this Court may be pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶20

¶21

Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State would oppose the petition and submit that the investigation is still in progress and that, so far, nine witnesses have been examined. It is further submitted that the presence of the petitioner may be required for the effective investigation of the case. On the said ground, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would pray for dismissal of the present petition.

¶22

I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the materials on record.

¶23

It is well settled that the jurisdiction under Section 482 BNSS is intended to protect an individual's personal liberty while ensuring that the legitimate requirements of investigation are not frustrated. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab , (1980) 2 SCC 565, and subsequently in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) , (2020) 5 SCC 1, has emphasized that the power of anticipatory bail has to be exercised on a careful consideration of the nature and gravity of the accusation, the role attributed to the applicant, the facts and circumstances of the case, and the need to balance the individual's right to personal liberty with the interests of a fair investigation.

¶24

Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the specific role attributed to the petitioner, the material presently available on record, and the fact that the petitioner has expressed his willingness to cooperate with the investigation, this Court is of the considered view

¶25

¶26

that his custodial interrogation is not shown to be indispensable at this stage. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is satisfied that the interests of justice can adequately be safeguarded by imposing appropriate conditions requiring the petitioner to cooperate with the investigation.

¶27

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed, subject to following conditions.

¶28

(A) The petitioner/Accused shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Pochampally Police Station, Yadadri-Bhongir District, on or before 24.09.2026. Upon such surrender or in the event of arrest the Station House Officer shall release him on bail on execution of a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each, to the satisfaction of the said officer.

¶29

(B) The petitioner shall remain available for investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer and shall cooperate fully with the investigation.

¶30

(C) The petitioner shall furnish his complete residential address and contact details to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated throughout the course of investigation.

¶31

(D) The petitioner shall not either directly or indirectly induce, threaten, influence, or contact any prosecution witness, nor shall he tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶32

¶33

(E) The petitioner shall strictly comply with all the conditions contemplated under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶34

(F) Any wilful breach or violation of any of the aforesaid conditions shall render the petitioner liable to appropriate proceedings before the court below, including cancellation of bail, in accordance with the provisions of the BNSS and other applicable law.

¶35

It is made clear that any observations made herein are confined solely to the adjudication of the present application for anticipatory bail and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶36

______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J

¶37

Date: 08.09.2026 mmr

¶38

¶39

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶40

CRIMINAL PETITION No.14109 OF 2026

¶41

DATE: 08.09.2026

¶42