Smt. Bandi Padmamma vs The State Of Telangana
2026 Latest Caselaw 257 Tel

Telangana High Court

Smt. Bandi Padmamma vs The State Of Telangana on 1 April, 2026

  IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

                        AT HYDERABAD

       THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.4164 of 2026

                          01.04.2026



Between:

Smt Bandi Padammama,
And others.
                                                      PETITIONERS

AND

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

                                                      RESPONDENT


                            ORDER

The present Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court

to grant pre arrest bail to the petitioners who are arrayed as

accused Nos.4 to 6 in Crime No.10 of 2026 before the

Kodandapur Police Station, registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 103(1), 118(1), 115(2) read with

3(5) of BNS.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 12.02.2026 at 12:30

hours, LW‑15 received a Telugu written petition from Bandi

Pavani W/o Bandi Hari Babu, aged 25 years, resident of

Shaikpally Village, stating that due to previous disputes over

agricultural land, her uncle Bandi Krishna and his family

members frequently quarrelled with them. On 11.02.2026 at

about 5:30 PM, while she and her husband were milking

cows, a quarrel ensued when Kurva Narsappa was asked to

slow down his vehicle. Immediately, Bandi Krishnudu, Bandi

Sreekar, and Bandi Bhaskar attacked her husband with

sticks, causing bleeding injuries. When her father‑in‑law

Bandi Ramudu intervened, he too was beaten on the head

with a stick, sustaining bleeding injuries. When she attempted

to rescue them, other family members namely Bandi Padma,

Bandi Gouthami, and Bandi Revathi also assaulted her,

causing injuries to her forehead, back, and legs.

3. Heard Sri KB. Narasimhulu, learned counsel for

petitioners, and Sri Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent - State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

petitioners are innocent women, falsely implicated due to

family land disputes. He contended that A1 to A3 have already

been arrested and remanded, material objects recovered, and

custodial interrogation of these petitioners is not required. He

asserted that no specific overt act is attributed to them, that

they were not present at the scene. Therefore, he prayed this

Court to allow this criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for

petitioners stating that the complaint clearly mentions the

participation of the petitioners in the assault, that they joined

with A1 to A3 in attacking the defacto complainant and her

family members, and that their role in the offence cannot be

ignored. It was contended that granting bail at this stage may

hamper the investigation. Therefore, he prayed this Court to

dismiss this Criminal Petition.

6. Having regard to rival submissions made and on going

through the material placed on record, it is noted that the

statements of the witnesses would show that these petitioners

also bet the deceased with sticks. Therefore, at this stage, it

cannot be observed that Section 103(1) of BNS is not

applicable to petitioners. However, taking into account the

overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems

it fit to direct the petitioners to surrender before the concerned

trial Court, and file a regular bail petition. On filing of such

petition, the trial Court is directed to consider the same and

pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

7. With the above directions, this Criminal Petition is

disposed of.

Miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 01.04.2026 PT