Telangana High Court
Katikaneni Harika vs The State Of Telangana on 21 May, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7199 of 2026
Date: 21.05.2026
Between:
Katikaneni Harika and another.
..Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2
And
The State of Telangana,
Rep. by Public Prosecutor,
High Court for the State of Telangana,
Hyderabad, through SHO, P.S. Kandukur,
Rachakonda Police Commissionerate and another
..Respondents
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 on anticipatory bail in the event of
their arrest in Crime No.284 of 2025, dated 24.11.2025 on the file
of Kandukur Police Station, for the offences punishable under
Sections 351(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 (for short “the BNS”) and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SCs & STs
(POA) Act, 2015.
2
2. Heard Mr. M.P.Kashyap, learned counsel for the petitioners
and Mr. D.Arun Kumar Doddla, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.1 – State. Despite service
of notice, there is no representation on behalf of respondent No.2.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 09.09.2025, one Sri
Nenavath Pavan Kumar, lodged a complaint with the Police,
Kandukur Police Station, Ranga Reddy District, stating that on
25.05.2025, he entered into a written agreement with the
petitioners for a debt transaction of Rs.1,00,00,000/-. As security,
he executed a registered sale deed in favour of petitioner No.1 in
respect of his agricultural land in Survey No.319/E/2, situated at
Gangumaarla Thanda, Kadthal Mandal. It was the agreement
between them that after repayment of the debt along with the
interest, the said land would be reconveyed to his name. When the
de facto complainant stated that he is ready and willing to repay the
entire debt with interest, petitioner No.1 refused to honour the
agreement and trying to retain his land. Petitioners threatened the
de facto complainant with dire consequences, assaulted him and
also abuse him in the name of caste.
3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that
admittedly there are transactions between the petitioners and the de
facto complainant arising out of a debt transaction of
Rs.1,00,00,000/-. Later, petitioner No.1 purchased the said
agricultural land to an extent of one acre by virtue of registered
sale deed bearing Document No.735 of 2025, dated 14.05.2025
from the de facto complainant by paying valuable sale
consideration and got registered the same in the name of petitioner
No.1 and pattadar pass book was also issued in her favour. After
selling the said land to petitioner No.1, de facto complainant
removed the pre-cast walls with the help of goons. Subsequently,
petitioner No.1 called “Dial-100” and raised complaint. Basing on
the said complaint, Police, Kadthal Police Station, registered a case
in Crime No.430 of 2025, dated 09.09.2025 for the offences
punishable under Sections 329(3), 324(4) and 351(2) read with
Section 3(5) BNS, issued FIR and investigated into the same.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended
that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in
the present case. There are no specific overt-acts against the
4
petitioners herein. The allegations against the petitioners are false
and baseless. Further, the witnesses are planted witnesses.
Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners
herein.
6. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits
that notice under Section 35(3) BNSS was served on the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.284 of 2025
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 31(2) read
with 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of of SCs & STs (POA)
Act, 2015 and, therefore, the offences alleged against the
petitioners are serious in nature. Investigation is still under
progress. Therefore, he prays this Court to dismiss the present
petition.
7. This Court having heard learned counsel for the petitioners
and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and upon perusal of
the material available on record, deems it appropriate to direct the
petitioners to obtain notice under Section 35(3) of BNS from the
Police and submit explanation to the said notice, as expeditiously
as possible. It is needless to mention that upon filing of such
5
explanation, the Station House Officer concerned shall examine the
same and take appropriate action, strictly in accordance with law.
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
_____________________
E.V.VENUGOPAL, J
21.05.2026
pns/kgk
6
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7199 of 2026
21.05.2026
pns/kgk
