M/s. Didharia Trading Co., v. The State of Telangana.
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-04-24. M/s. Didharia Trading Co., v. The State of Telangana. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
3303 ] [ IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO:6345 OF 2026 Between: 1. M/s. Didharia Trading Co. , Rep. by it's Proprietor Mr. Subhash Chander, At. Shop No. 123,2nd Addl. lvlandi Sirsa Village, Sirsa District, Haryana, 125055. 2. Mr. Subhash Chander, S/o. Deep Chand, Occupation. Proprietor of M/s. Didharia Trading Co. , R/o Shop No. 123,2nd Addl. Mandi Sirsa Village, Sirsa District, Haryana,'l 25055. ... Petitioners/Accused No. 1 & 2 And 1- The State of Telangana, rep. By its Public prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad. 2. Mls. NACL lndustries Ltd. , Rep. by it's Manager-Legal, Mr. M. Ram Kumar, Plot No,12C Block Lakshmi Towers, NAGARJUNA Hills Panjagutta Hyderabad 500082. ...
RespondenUCom plai nant Petition under Section 484 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to modify/ reduction the docket order dated 27. 02. 2026 in Crl. M. P. No. 6477 ot 2025 in STC Nl No. BO31 of 2024 directing sureties to non-juristic person i. e Petitioner No. 1. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Syed Tousif 8asha, Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2 The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH C'OURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABT,E SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 6345 of 2 026 Date:24. 04. 2026 Betrveen M/s Didhari:r'lrading Co. , and another . . . Pc titioners / accused Nos.
1 and 2 AND The State ol'I'elangana and another Respondents Order: This Criminal Petition has bcen filcd aggrieved by the order passed by rhc learned Additional Sessions Judge for the trial of Jubilee Hills Car Bomb Blasr Cases-cum-Additional Family Court-cum-XXlll Adclitional Chiel Judgc-cum,lX Additional Sessions Judge, H1,dt:rabad, ilor short, 'the trial Court') in Crl. M. P. No. 647B ot 2025 in S. 'l. C. NI. No. 8O31 of 2024, dated 27. O2. 2026, insofar as directing thc petitioner No. I to execute a personal bond for Rs. 25,000/ with tw,t sureties is concerned. 2. Heard Mr. Sved Tousif Basha, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. Jithcndar Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of respondent No. l. \ \ i I ) =l 3. Notice in respect of respondent No. 2 is dispensed with on the ground that the petitioners have hled the present petition seeking modification of impugned order, and they are not seeking any relief against respondent No. 2.
Respondent No. 2 is arrayed only as a proforma respondent. 4. Learned counsel lor the petitioners submitted that the learned trial Court, on 27. 02. 2026, allowed Crl. M. P. No. 6478 of 2025 and directed the petitioners to execute a personal bond oi Rs. 25,00O/ - with two sureties each and lurther directed to pay Rs. 1,000/- costs to complainant. He further submitted that petitioner No. I, being a proprietorship concern and not a juristic person, question of furnishing sureties by petitioner No. 1 does not arise. The petitioners have already complied with the direction regarding payment of costs of Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant Hence, requested this Court to modify the impugned order insofar as directing the petitioner No. 1 to execute a personal bond for Rs. 25,00O/- with two sureties is concerned. 5. Learned Additionat Public Prosecutor has not opposed the submission madb by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 6.
Having considered the submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the legrned trial Court, on 27 . 02. 2026, allowed . l Y 3 Crl. M. P. No. 6478 'tt 2025 and directed the petitioncrs to execute a personal bond ol Rs. 2. 5,00O/ - rn,ith two sureties each and to pay Rs. 1,OO01 costs to complainant and also imposed other conditions. Petitroncr No. 1 is a proprietorship concern and not a juristic person. 7. In view of rhe above, the impugned order passed by the learned trial l Court to the extent ol directing pe titioner No. l to furnish personal bond of Rs. 25,00O/- with sureties to the l l satisfaction of the tnal Court is liable to be set aside and accordingiy set aside. Thc other conditions imposed by the trial I Court shall remain una Ite re d. 8. With the abovc said modification, thc criminal petition is disposed ol. Miscellaneotrs applications, pcnding if any, shall stand closed. SD/.
AHMED ABDULLA KHAN ASS]STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, '1 . The Additional sessions Judge for the Triar of jubiree Hiils car Bomb Brast case cum lX Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. 2. The Station House Officer, Saifabad police Station, Hyderabad. 3. Two ccs to the pubric prosecutor, High court oi T-erangana at Hyderabad lourl CC to Sri Syed Tousif Basha, Advocate 1 9n" IOpUC] 5. Two CD Copies GNK W HIGH COURT DATED: 2410412026 ,3 I t-i E. 1 ;i, F4 ) 7 t ) L 2 I APR 7. n)fr . , ,. /. . c_', -1- . f ORDER i I CRLP. No. 6345 of 2026 I I I I I I i I i DISPOSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION t i I 1k v\
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.