Sayyad Mahirun, v. The State Of Telangana

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT

HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3903 of 2026 DATE: 24.03.2026 Between:

Sayyad Mahirum .... Petitioner/Accused No.1 AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and another .... Respondent/Complainant

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioner/Accused No.1 seeking enlargement on bail in connection with Crime No.81 of 2026 of Jubilee Hills Police Station, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143(2), 144(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that, on 10.02.2026, the defacto complainant lodged a report stating that, based on reliable information, the petitioner was running a brothel by exploiting women from various places. Acting immediately, he, along with panch witnesses, conducted a raid. During the raid, the petitioner was found along with accused No.4, who was a customer, and the victims. After recording the victims' statements, the police registered a case for the aforementioned offences 3.

Heard Sri Jula Sandeep Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri M. Ramachander Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1State. 4.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and had been in judicial custody since 10.02.2026 and that the crucial part of the investigation had already been completed. He further submitted that the daughter of accused No.1 is studying in the 10th standard and has to appear for the SSC public examinations. Therefore, he prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner. 5.

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegations against the petitioner were severe

and heinous in nature, as the petitioner is the main accused and organizer of the brothel house, therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to bail. However, he informed the Court that there were no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. 6.

In light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon a perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 10.02.2026. As per the remand case diary, prosecution witnesses LWs.1 to 12, including the investigating officer, have already been examined. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, including the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, the duration of incarceration, and the fact that the petitioner's daughter is due to appear for her SSC public examination, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner-accused No.1, subject to the following conditions: i.

The petitioner-accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XVII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Nampally.

ii.

The petitioner-accused No.1 shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

iii.

The petitioner-accused No.1 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

7.

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 24.03.2026 SS

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3903 OF 2026 DATE : 24.03.2026 SS