The court emphasized the need for a thorough investigation into serious allegations of abuse and exploitation, ruling the petition for quashing to be without merit.

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the CrPC’) seeking quashment of F.I.R. No.512 of 2025 of Bachupally Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionarate.

2. I have heard Mr. Duddu Nava Kiran, learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.8 to 10 and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent No.1-State.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief is that, Respondent No.2/ de facto complainant, lodged a police report alleging that in 2023, her elder daughter was subjected to sexual abuse by the son of their landlord. This incident was registered as Crime No. 229 of 2023 under Section s 376-D (gang rape), 452 (house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ), along with relevant provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SCs/STs (POA) Act).

Subsequently, it was alleged that the accused threatened the victim, leading to the registration of a second First Information Report (FIR No. 86 of 2024).

Amidst these developments, Respondent No.2 discovered that her husband, her aunt, her cousin, and certain pastors associated with Rock Church, Bachupally, had been clandestinely drugging her and recording explicit videos without her consent. It was alleged that these acts formed part of an international pornography racket. She further contended that to subdue her awareness and resistance, the accused administered sedatives in overdose and even filmed videos involving acts mimicking necrophilia (‘dead body sex’). According to her, the pastors further manipulated her psychological state, isolated her from external support, and conspired to portray her as mentally unfit.

Additionally, she alleged that she was subjected to physical torture, including beatings, starvation, and verbal abuse. Her minor children were allegedly coerced and physically assaulted to force them into declaring her mentally unstable. Her elder daughter was reportedly sexually exploited by the complainant’s husband and his accomplices, with the aim of generating substantial illicit income from such criminal acts.

Despite her attempts to seek redress, including filing a complaint before the National Human Rights Commission, the complainant was allegedly pressured and intimidated by the accused into withdrawing her case. Thus, citing instances of sexual exploitation within marriage, child abuse, non-consensual pornography, physical torture, and caste-based discrimination, Respondent No.2 filed the present police report.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the allegations levelled against his clients are wholly baseless and devoid of merit. He submits that the petitioners are pastors affiliated with the Church and have no involvement whatsoever in the commission of the alleged offences. It is further submitted that a plain reading of the police report does not disclose any prima facie case against the petitioners warranting their prosecution. Counsel emphasizes that the de facto complainant is purportedly a person suffering from mental instability, and the allegations made therein are speculative, exaggerated, and the product of delusion. He asserts that the contents of the police report, even if taken at face value and accepted in their entirety, do not constitute the ingredients of any cognizable offence aga