Authority: High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad

Order Date: 06 July 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Petitioner – Smt. Perala Sri Vidya (wife of a company director, referred to as A.1); Respondent – State of Telangana represented by Public Prosecutor and Chaitanyapuri Police Station.
  • FIR Details: FIR No. 579 of 2026 registered at Chaitanyapuri Police Station, Malkajgiri District, concerning alleged offences under Section 318(4) of the BNSS and Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors and Financial Establishment Act, 1999 (TSPDFEA Act).
  • Alleged Facts: On 26‑04‑2026 the complainant reported that in August 2020 an agent named Sharma of Akshara Chit Fund offered a chit of Rs 10,00,000 for a 50‑month term, with 12 months already elapsed. Monthly instalment was Rs 20,000. The complainant paid Rs 25,000 in August 2020 and Rs 2,50,000 in October 2020 as past‑balance, then continued paying Rs 20,000 monthly for a total of 48 instalments, amounting to Rs 9,60,000. An amount of Rs 50,000 was taken by Sharma for personal needs, leaving a net payment of Rs 9,10,000 towards the chit. The complainant could not pay the final two months’ instalments. After the chit completed in March 2023, the complainant sought refund of the amount after deducting the pending instalments. The accused – Sharma, Branch Manager Ramchander, Rajender, Chairman Srinivasa Rao and his wife Sri Vidya – evaded repayment and issued eight cheques that were subsequently dishonoured.
  • Legal Contentions:
  • Petitioner’s Counsel (Sri Saini Aravind) argued that Sri Vidya was falsely implicated, added to the case after arrest in unrelated matters, without specific allegations, and that she had resigned from all directorships prior to the transactions. The counsel contended that the matter pertains to chit‑fund activities under the Chit Funds Act, not “deposits” under TSPDFEA, and that multiple FIRs violate Section 242 BNSS. Citing Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, the counsel sought regular bail.
  • Respondent’s Counsel (Sri D. Arun Kumar) maintained that the offence is serious, the petitioner was an active participant, and that investigation is incomplete with several victims; therefore custodial interrogation is necessary and bail should be denied.
  • Custody Details: The petitioner has been in jail since 11‑05‑2026.
  • Additional Facts: The petitioner is identified as a director (A.1) of the accused company and the wife of A.1.

Final Outcome

  • The Court granted regular bail to Smt. Perala Sri Vidya subject to the following conditions:

1. Execution of a personal bond of Rs 25,000 (Rupees Twenty‑Five Thousand only) with two sureties of equal amount, to be approved by the learned IV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate‑cum‑IV AJCJ, Rangareddy, at L.B. Nagar.

2. Mandatory appearance before the concerned Station House Officer between 09:00 a.m. and 05:00 p.m. every Monday for eight weeks or until the charge‑sheet is filed, whichever is earlier, for investigation purposes, with further appearances as required.

3. Compliance with the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (currently Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

  • The petition is allowed; any pending miscellaneous applications are to stand closed.

Topics: Criminal Procedure, Chit Fund Fraud