##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.10032 of 2026

Date: 06.04.2026 Between:

Tallari Murali ..Petitioner

And The State of Telangana, rep. by its

Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat,

Hyderabad and others ..Respondents

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:-

“...pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in sending the Victim Girl No. 2 namely Gundrathi Pavithra Jyothi to shelter home namely Prajwal Home at Tukkuguda, in connection with Crime No. 422/2026 and keeping her under detention for days together, as highly illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently direct the respondents to forthwith take necessary steps for release of the petitioner from Prajwal Home at Tukkuguda, without reference to

pendency of Crime No.422/2026 and pass…”

2. Heard Sri Ramesh Kadari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government

Pleader for Home, for the respondents and perused the record.

2

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that on 13.02.2026 at about 4:00 p.m., respondent No.3, acting on credible information regarding the alleged running of a brothel at Glam Factor Beauty and Wellness Spa, Madhapur, conducted a raid along with his team. During the raid, the police apprehended certain accused persons along with three women, treating them as victims, and registered FIR No.422/2026, dated 13.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144 BNS and Sections 3,

4, and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.

4. It is contended that the petitioner is the cousin brother of Victim Girl No.2, namely Gundrathi Pavithra Jyothi, who was among those found during the raid. Subsequent to the registration of the case, she was shifted to a shelter home, namely Prajwal Home at Tukkuguda, where she has been confined since then. The said victim had visited the premises solely in search of employment, having been informed of job opportunities at the spa. She had no knowledge of any illegal or immoral activities being carried on there, and before she could even comprehend the situation, the police conducted the raid and shifted her to the

shelter home.

5. Even assuming, without admitting, any involvement on her part, she is a major and cannot be detained in a rescue or

3

protective home against her will. Such continued detention is arbitrary, unjustified, and violative of her fundamental rights. The authorities, after completing necessary counseling procedures, ought to have released her instead of keeping her in prolonged custody without valid grounds. Her continued stay in the shelter home is causing serious prejudice to her personal life, particularly as she is a married woman, and is adversely affecting her dignity

as well as the reputation of her family and matrimonial home.

6. Reliance is placed on a recent judgment of the Bombay High Court in Xyz vs. State of Maharashtra1, wherein it was held that detention of a major victim in a protective home under Section 17(4) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act is impermissible, especially when such detention is based solely on lack of support or resources. The Court categorically held that prostitution per se is not an offence and that victims cannot be forcibly confined

against their will.

7. The continued detention of the petitioner’s cousin is illegal and unsustainable in law. Being a major, she is entitled to exercise her personal liberty, and her confinement is a clear violation of constitutional safeguards. The petitioner has no efficacious alternative remedy and is therefore constrained to invoke the

1

2026 SCC OnLine Bom 185

4

extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under Article 226

of the Constitution of India.

8. Learned Assista