Pikkele Srinivas , Nivas, v. State Of Andhra Pradesh,
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10464 of 2016
ORDER
The petitioner, who is A.3 in crime No.183 of 2016 of Piduguralla Police Station, Guntur District, filed the present application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking release in the event of his arrest in connection with above crime registered for an offence punishable under Sections 417, 354A, 354C of Indian Penal Code, Sections 66E and 67 of Information Technologies Act and Section 3 (i) 8w(i) of SCs & STs (POA) Act, 2015. The case of the prosecution is that A.1, who is a relative of the informant, approached the informant and asked her to act in short films and accordingly introduced A.2 as a producer of short films. One day A.2 made phone call to the informant and asked her to come to his office for photo audition, for which the informant accepted and went to the audition where A.2 introduced A.3 and A.4. One week thereafter, A.
1 made a phone call to the informant and asked her to come to the office of A.2. On that, informant went there and found A.1 to A.4 present. A.3 and A.4 advised the informant to have massage and left the office. Thereafter, A.1 and A.2 administered whisky lace with cool drink to the informant, took signatures on some papers, collected ID proofs, stripped her clothes and when she was in dozed off, took nude photographs and videos of her under the guise of massage and copied them to on a computer and pen drive. When the informant questioned the same, A.2 blackmailed her to publish them and forced her to participate in sex with him. Thereafter, the informant started avoiding the accused. On that, A.5 and A.6 went to the residential locality of the informant, shown the objectionable photos to some of the residents.
Left with no other option, the informant lodged the present report.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. Basing on the averments made in the report given by the victim, it
cannot be said that the petitioner is innocent of the offence. The allegations in the report disclose that on the pretext that the informant was selected to act in short films, took nude photographs and videos of her under the guise of massage and forced her to have sexual contacts with A.2 and when the informant resisted the acts of the accused, they threatened her to release the photos and videos to public. Since the allegations leveled against the petitioner are grave and serious in nature and as the investigation is still pending, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _______________________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR 26.07.2016 sur