Allowed

Jangam Ravi Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Sept 2026CRLP/14332/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought bail under Section 483 BNSS alleging false implication in cyber offence under BNS/IT Act. Court allowed bail after noting investigation completion and custodial detention, imposing bond, reporting, and witness interference conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail with orders: (i) personal bond Rs. 15,000 and two sureties; (ii) appear at SHO officer's office Sundays for eight weeks; (iii) comply with Section 480(3) BNSS; (iv) no witn

Jangam Ravi Kumar Vs The State of Telangana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO

¶3

CRIMINAL PETITION No.14332 of 2026

¶4

(CNR.No. HBHC010600112026)

DATE: 15.09.2026

BETWEEN:

Jangam Ravi Kumar

…..Petitioner-A5

And

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

¶11

…..Respondent-Complainant

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused No.5 in connection with Crime No.143 of 2026 of P.S.

¶14

TGCSB, Cyber Crime Police, Hyderabad. The offence alleged against the petitioner-A5 is punishable under Sections 66-C, 66-D of IT Act, Sections 111(2)(b), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) of of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Act, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

¶15

¶16

Heard Sri M. Amarnath, learned counsel for the petitioner-A5 and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent–State.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-A5 is falsely implicated in the case and Section 111 of BNS is not applicable to the facts of the case on hand. Earlier bail application filed by the petitioner-A5 came to be dismissed on 18.08.2026, entire investigation is completed, he is entitled for mandatory bail also. Petitioner-A5 is in judicial custody since 15.06.2026, petitioner-A5 is granted bail in FIR No.137 of 2026 of P.S. Cyber Crimes, Hyderabad and prayed to enlarge the petitioner-A5 on bail.

¶18

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the role played by the petitioner-A5 is clearly depicted in the remand case diary.

¶19

Petitioner-A5 is produced before the trial Court on PT Warrant and it was regularized on 15.06.2026, since then he is in jail.

¶20

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions submits that the petitioner is enlarged on bail in FIR No.137 of 2026 of P.S. Cyber Crimes, Hyderabad.

¶22

Petitioner-A5 has filed Crl.P.No.12876 of 2026 for

¶23

grant of bail, the same came to be dismissed vide order dated 18.08.2026 with an observation that the petitionerA5 is not taken into custody as on date and it is mentioned in the written instructions that the presence of the petitioner-A5 is required to identify the kingpins, recover electronic evidence, trace the money trail and identify other beneficiaries.

¶24

8. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor on instructions

¶25

submits that police custody is not taken so far.

¶26

Petitioner-A5 is in judicial custody since 15.06.2026, major portion of the investigation is completed, detaining the petitioner-A5 further in judicial custody will not serve the purpose. Hence, the petitioner-A5 is entitled to be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:

¶27

¶28

i. The petitioner-A5 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶29

ii. The petitioner-A5 shall appear before the concerned SHO between 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., on every Sunday 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.

¶30

iii. The petitioner-A5 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.(presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

¶31

iv. The petitioner-A5 shall not directly or indirectly influence, threaten, or induce any of the prosecution witnesses.

¶32

v. It is made clear that if any of the conditions imposed by this Court are violated, the prosecution is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of the bail.

¶33

¶34

10. Accordingly, this Criminal petition is allowed.

¶35

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall

¶36

stand closed.

¶37

B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, J

¶38

Date: 15.09.2026 TU

¶39

¶40

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO

¶41

CRIMINAL PETITION No.14332 of 2026 (CNR.No. HBHC010600112026)

¶42

Date: 15.09.2026

¶43

Jangam Ravi Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jangam Ravi Kumar 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