SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 12482

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Bogireddy Murali Mohan Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
CRLP 2204/2026



##PAGE1##

1

2026:APHC:38500

APHC010144542026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3396]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2204/2026 Between:

1. BOGIREDDY MURALI MOHAN REDDY, S/O. B.VEERA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,R/O.D.NO. 1/2593, BRUNDAVAN TOWERSKADAPA CITY, YSR KADAPA

DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by its Public Prosecutor,Through its B. Mattam Police StationYSR

Kadapa DistrictHigh Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati.

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of

BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtmay be pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest in F.LR.No.5 of 2026 on the file of B.Mattam Police

Station, YSR (Kadapa) District and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

##PAGE2##

2

2026:APHC:38500

1. SHAIK MOHAMMED ISMAIL

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Court made the following:

##PAGE3##

3

2026:APHC:38500

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2204/2026

ORDER:-

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner/Accused No.4, in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.5 of 2026 on the file of B. Mattam Police Station, YSR Kadapa District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3, 4, 5 and

7(1) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 11.01.2026 at about 3:30 PM, in Room No.2D of Sri Virat Deluxe Residence Lodge, B. Mattam Town & Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, Accused No.1 allegedly procured victims for prostitution and was running prostitution activities in the said lodge with the assistance of Accused Nos.3 to 5. Based on the panchanama, the present crime

was registered.

##PAGE4##

4

2026:APHC:38500

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the material

available on record.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the petitioner is not involved in the day-to-day management of the lodge and is carrying on business at Hyderabad. It is further contended that there are no specific allegations or overt acts attributed to the petitioner, and his implication is solely based on the alleged confession of co- accused, which is not admissible in evidence. It is also submitted that the investigation is substantially completed, other accused are already arrested, and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not

required. Hence, he seeks grant of anticipatory bail.

5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the petition, contending that the investigation is still pending, and the petitioner is absconding. It is further submitted that granting anticipatory bail at this stage may hamper the investigation and there is a every likelihood of the petitioner not

cooperating with the investigating agency.

##PAGE5##

5

2026:APHC:38500

6. Considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the offences alleged include Section 143(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which prescribes a punishment of not less than seven years. Though the other offences under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act carry lesser punishment, the gravity of the allegations cannot be ignored at this stage. It is also to be noted that the investigation is still in progress and only a few witnesses have been examined so far. The petitioner is shown as abscon

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top