logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 TSHC 094 print Preview print print
Court : High Court for the State of Telangana
Case No : Criminal Petition No. 1433 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE ME. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
Parties : Uppathala Charan Kumar Versus The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor, L.B. Nagar
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Chekka Rajkumar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Public Prosecutor.
Date of Judgment : 12-03-2026
Head Note :-
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 480 & 483 -
Judgment :-

1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is accused in Crime No.72 of 2026 of L.B.Nagar Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 69 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 13.01.2026 at about 20:50 hours the complainant lodged a complaint stating that her maternal aunt’s son who is the petitioner herein had been expressing his love and intention to marry her since the time she was studying Intermediate First Year. Initially, she refused the proposal stating that she was a minor and wished to continue her studies, but the accused continued to contact and follow her. On 12.01.2025, he again approached her at her college and persuaded her to accept his proposal by assuring that they would marry after she attained majority. Thereafter, they remained in contact and on 04.06.2025, the accused allegedly took the victim to an OYO room at Sai Nagar Colony, Bairamalguda, on the promise of marriage and had physical relation with her. Subsequently, when the victim informed him that she had missed her menstrual periods, he again assured that he would marry her; however, she is seven months pregnant and the accused is refusing to marry her and is disputing the paternity of the child. Based on the said complaint, the present case is registered against the accused for the above offence.

3. Heard Sri Ch.Raj Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner never misbehaved with the victim during their relationship and never requested for illegal means and he never cheated her. The averments of the complaint show that the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner herein is in jail from 13.01.2026, hence, prayed this Court to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed bail stating that the offence committed by the petitioner is a heinous offence. Under the promise of marriage, he cheated the victim and sexually exploited her. On the date of giving complaint, the victim was seven months pregnant and on 18.02.2026 she gave birth to a baby boy. Hence, petitioner is not entitled to bail and prayed to dismiss this criminal petition.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the allegation against the petitioner is that, under the guise of a promise of marriage, he allegedly developed a physical relationship with the de facto complainant and thereby exploited her. Believing his assurance of marriage, the de facto complainant continued the relationship, as a result of which she became pregnant and subsequently gave birth to a child and that petitioner is now refusing to marry her and has also denied responsibility for the paternity of the child. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the DNA samples have not yet been collected since the child has to attain a minimum age of two months for collection of the sample for conducting DNA analysis. However, considering the period of incarceration of petitioner in jail and the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it fit to grant regular bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions :

               i. The petitioner shall execute 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 II AJCJ-cum-II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.

               ii. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO between 09.00 a.m and 5.00 p.m., on every 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.

               iii. The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 483(2) of the BNSS.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

 
  CDJLawJournal