Smt Chewa Pushpa 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. 15445 of 2025 DATE: 08.12.2025 Between:

Smt. Chevva Pushpa .... Petitioner/Accused No.3 AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, through P.S. Chaitanyapuri, L.B. Nagar, Rachakonda.

.... 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.3 seeking enlargement on bail in connection with Crime No.887 of 2025 of Chaitanyapuri Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections

- 2 - 223, 99, 143(4), 144(2) read with 49 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and Sections 7, 8, 11 and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

2.

The brief facts of the case are that, on 09.09.2025, the de-facto complainant lodged a report stating that, based on reliable information that some persons were conducting cross massage, he immediately, along with panch witnesses, conducted a raid. During the raid, the organizers (I and II), customers, and victim girls, including minors were found. After recording the statements of the victims, the police registered a case for the aforementioned offences. 3.

Heard Sri N. Srushman Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondentState. 4.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and that, without there being any prima facie evidence against the

- 3 - petitioner, the petitioner was falsely implicated in the case. He further argued that the petitioner had been in judicial custody since 12.09.2025 and that the crucial part of the investigation had already been completed, except for the filing of the charge sheet. He further contended that accused Nos.1 and 2, who were the prime accused, had already been released on bail. Therefore, he prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner. 5.

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that he had sent notice to the victims, but as of the date, it had not been served on them and that the allegations against the petitioner were severe in nature and that the offence committed by the petitioner was heinous; therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to bail. However, he informed the Court that there were no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and that no charge sheet had been filed. 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 12.09.2025. As recorded in the remand case diary, the petitioner was described as a co‐organizer, and the prosecution witnesses LWs.1 to 16, including the investigating

- 4 - officer, had already been examined, and no charge sheet is filed. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, including the nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, and the duration of incarceration, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner-accused No.3, subject to the following conditions:

i.

The petitioner-accused No.3 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Sessions Judge for Trial and Disposal of Cases under POCSO Act, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar.

ii.

The petitioner-accused No.3 shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) week 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.3 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in

- 5 - 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: 08.12.2025 SS

- 6 - THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.15445 OF 2025 DATE : 08.12.2025 SS