Mahender vs The state of Telangana Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR — CRLP/5375/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED NO COSTS on 13th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HBHC010228902026

Filing Number

CRLP/6430/2026

Filing Date

09-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRLP/5375/2026

Registration Date

09-Apr-2026

Judge

K. Sujana

Coram

K. Sujana

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRLP ( 41 )

Sub-Category

U/s.438 Cr.p.c Anticipatory Bail ( 61 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL Section

Decision Date

13-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED NO COSTS

Last updated 19-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Mahender

    Adv. NARESH VERMA BAVANDLAPELLI

  2. 2.Laxmaiah

  3. 3.Rokkomma

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The state of Telangana Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Apr-2026

    K. SujanaView PDF

    Summary The Telangana High Court granted pre-arrest bail to three accused (Mahender and two others) involved in a road-work dispute that resulted in mutual injuries and criminal intimidation charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court found the incident to be a mutual quarrel where both parties sustained injuries and had filed counter-complaints, warranting bail subject to conditions including a ₹25,000 personal bond, cooperation with investigation, and weekly appearance before the investigating officer. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Apr-2026

    Interlocutory(fresh Bail Petitions)

    K. Sujana

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 09-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRLP/5375/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Telangana High Court granted pre-arrest bail to three accused (Mahender and two others) involved in a road-work dispute that resulted in mutual injuries and criminal intimidation charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court found the incident to be a mutual quarrel where both parties sustained injuries and had filed counter-complaints, warranting bail subject to conditions including a ₹25,000 personal bond, cooperation with investigation, and weekly appearance before the investigating officer. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case