logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 TSHC 080 print Preview print print
Court : High Court for the State of Telangana
Case No : Criminal Appeal No. 221 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. MADHUSUDHAN RAO
Parties : Gade Innaiah @ Gade Inna Reddy Versus The State of Telangana, Rep.by DSP, Hyderabad
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Kamatam Rajitha, Advocate. For the Respondent: P. Vishnuvardhana Reddy, SC for Nia.
Date of Judgment : 02-03-2026
Head Note :-
National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 – Section 21 – Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Section 152 – Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Sections 13, 39 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 528 – Interim Bail – Funeral rites – Conditions of bail – Personal liberty – Appeal challenging conditions imposed while granting interim bail rejected as Designated Court had already granted bail for two days to attend father’s funeral rites.

Court Held – Criminal Appeal Disposed of – If extension of interim bail is required for attending subsequent ceremonies, accused must approach Designated Court which can examine entire case record – Condition restricting meeting with outsiders modified as unreasonable and violative of Article 21; appellant permitted to attend rites without interacting with media – Liberty granted to seek extension or fresh interim bail before Designated Court, which shall decide application expeditiously.

[Paras 10, 11, 12, 13, 14]

Keywords: Section 21 NIA Act – Interim Bail – Funeral Rites – Bail Conditions – Article 21 – Media Interaction Restriction – Extension of Bail – Designated Court Jurisdiction – UAPA Offences – Criminal Appeal
Judgment :-

K. Lakshman, J.

1. Heard Mr. Nandigam Krishna Rao, learned Senior Counsel representing Ms. Kamatam Rajitha, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. P. Vishnuvardhan Reddy, learned Special Public Prosecutor for NIA.

2. This appeal is filed under Section - 21 of the National Investigating Agency Act read with section - 528 of BNSS, challenging the order dated 28.02.2026 in Crl.M.P. No.394 of 2026 in R.C. No.04/2025/NIA/HYD of P.S. NIA, Hyderabad, passed by learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

3. The appellant herein is the sole accused in R.C.No.04/2025/NIA/HYD of P.S. NIA, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against him are under Section - 152 of BNS and Sections - 13 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

4. He has filed an application seeking interim bail in the said crime before the Designated Court for a period of four (04) weeks to attend the last rites and rituals of his father, who died on 28.02.2026 and also discharge his duties at the Maa Illu Orphanage Children as he is the care taker and there are crucial final examinations of childeren.

5. The respondent - Investigating Agency opposed the said application contending that there are serious allegations leveled against the appellant herein. He has collected donations etc., and he has also has links with Maoists. He has publicly supported the said banned Maoists Organization. When interim bail was granted to the appellant herein for a period of two (02) days on imposition of certain conditions on the death of his mother, to attend her funeral, He violated the said conditions and gave interview to Media People. There is every possibility of the appellant threatening protected witnesses and other witnesses. There is also possibility of the appellant jumping bail and non-cooperation with the Investigating Agency in the subject crime as the Investigation is in progress.

6. Vide the impugned order dated 28.02.2026, learned Designated Court granted interim bail to the appellant herein on imposition of certain conditions, more particularly condition No.(f) i.e., The petitioner/A1 shall only be allowed to attend the rites and rituals of his deceased father without meeting any of the outsiders except that he may be permitted to meet his immediate family member.

7. Challenging the said order, the appellant filed the present appeal.

8. As discussed above, learned Designated Court granted interim bail for a period of two (02) days i.e., 01.03.2026 and 02.03.2026. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that funeral has already been started and it is going to conclude by 6.00 P.M. It is already 3.00 P.M.

9. Learned Senior Counsel also would contend that though the appellant sought interim bail for a period of four (04) weeks, learned Designated Court granted only for two (02) days. 9th, 10th, 11th and 13th day’s ceremonies are there and the appellant herein has to perform such ceremonies. 13th day ceremony is on 12.03.2026.

10. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, it is apt to note that Section - 21 of the NIA Act, 2008 deals with ‘appeals’. It is relevant and the same is extracted as under:

               “21. Appeals.—(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, an appeal shall lie from any judgment, sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court to the High Court both on facts and on law.

               (2) Every appeal under sub-section (1) shall be heard by a bench of two Judges of the High Court and shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within a period of three months from the date of admission of the appeal.

               (3) Except as aforesaid, no appeal or revision shall lie to any court from any judgment, sentence or order including an interlocutory order of a Special Court.

               (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3) of section 378 of the Code, an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of the Special Court granting or refusing bail.

               (5) Every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of thirty days from the date of the judgment, sentence or order appealed from:

               Provided that the High Court may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of thirty days:

               Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained after the expiry of period of ninety days.”

11. In the present case, learned Designated Court granted interim bail to the appellant on imposition of certain conditions. It is not a rejection of bail. In fact, learned Designated Court granted interim bail to the appellant on imposition of certain conditions.

12. If the appellant wants extension of the said order, it is for him to approach the Designated Court by filing appropriate application, and the Designated Court will have the benefit of going through the entire case record and also examination of the contentions raised by the appellant and the NIA. Thus, it is for the Designated Court to dispose of application which would be filed by the appellant herein seeking extension of bail on the ground that he has to attend 9th to 11th and 13th day’s ceremonies of his father.

13. With regard to the aforesaid condition No.(f) imposed by learned Designated Court that the appellant shall only be allowed to attend the rites and rituals of his deceased father without meeting any of the outsiders except that he may be permitted to meet his immediate family member, we are of the prima facie view that the said condition is unreasonable and it is in violation of Article - 21 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, we are inclined to modify the said condition in the following manner:

               “The appellant - accused No.1 shall only be allowed to attend the rites and rituals of his deceased father without giving interviews to any Media people i.e., Print, Electronic and Social Media. At the same time, neither NIA Officials nor local police shall harass him in any manner on the ground of violation of the aforesaid order of learned Designated Court and this Court.”

14. However, the appellant herein is at liberty to approach learned Designated Court seeking extension of the aforesaid bail or file fresh application seeking interim bail to attend his father’s 9th to 11th and 13th day’s ceremonies, and on filing such application (s), learned Designated Court shall dispose of the same in accordance with law within two (02) days thereafter. The NIA shall co-operate with the learned Designated Court in disposing of such application (s).

15. During course of hearing, it is also brought to the notice of this Court that the application filed by the appellant seeking regular bail is posted for orders on 09.03.2026. However, learned Designated Court shall dispose of the said application in accordance with law without being influenced by any of the observations made in this order.

16. With the aforesaid directions and observations, this appeal is disposed of.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed.
 
  CDJLawJournal