IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1580 of 2026 DATE: 24.02.2026 BETWEEN:

Shaik Anwar @ Vijay., And another. …..Petitioners And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

…..Respondent

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioners on bail who are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.222 of 2026 before the Gachibowli Police Station, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 143(3), 144(2) of BNS, and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 04.02.2026 at about 16:30 hours, the Detective Inspector of Police, Gachibowli Police Station, received credible information that prostitution activities were being conducted at Plot Nos.49 & 50, Door No.104, Sai Balaji Cubicle Apartment, Raghavendra Colony, Kondapur, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District. The information was entered in the General Diary, and permission was obtained from the ACP, Narsingi Division. A raid was conducted at 17:00 hours with police staff, women police personnel, and panch witnesses. During the raid, accused Shaik Anwar @ Vijay (A-1) was apprehended, who confessed that he along with Sairigapu Gayatri (A-2) had been running a prostitution racket for three months. Two customers were found at the premises, one waiting and another engaged in sexual activity with a sex worker. Cash, mobile phones, condoms, and other material were seized under panchanama. The accused were taken into custody and a case was registered in Crime No.222/2026 under Sections 143(3), 144(2) BNS and Sections 3, 4, 5 of the PITA Act, 1956.

3. Heard Sri N.Narsimulu, learned counsel for petitioners, and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 have been falsely implicated, as there is no mention of them in the original complaint. The prosecution relies only on confessional statements, which are inadmissible in law. He further submitted that under Section 13 of the PITA Act, only a Special Police Officer (SPO) appointed by the State Government is authorized to conduct raids and investigations, whereas in the present case, the raid was conducted by personnel lacking such statutory authority, rendering the proceedings illegal. He contended that substantial witness statements have already been recorded, material evidence seized, and hence there is no scope of tampering. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are serious in nature. He further submitted that the investigation was not yet completed. At this stage, the question of grant of bail to the petitioners does not arise. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 6. Having regard to rival submissions made, and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that there are serious allegations against the petitioners, and the investigation in the case is not yet completed. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that there are no merits in this criminal petition, and the same is liable to be dismissed.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________

K. SUJANA, J Date: 24.02.2026 PT