APHC010274212025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRi JUSTICE T.G.D.SEKHAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5617 OF 2025 Between: Chalasani Prasana Bharagav, S/o.Srinivasa Rao, R/o.DiNo.72-6-4, Thotavari St , Lakshmi Hospital Road, Patamata, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ...Petitioner/Accused No.1 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through Station House Officer Krishnalanka Police Statioh,' NTR District, Prosecutor, High Court at Andhra Pradesh. 2. Sri Ch.Prakash, S/o.Not known to the petitidher, pcc;Inspector of Police, Machavaram Police . Station, Vijayawada, NtR pistrict, Andhra Pradesh. Rep.by it's Public s ■ i ...Respondents/Cbmplainant Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant Anticipatory Bail in the event of arrest to the petitioner, in the Crime No. ^67-of 2025 registefed at M ■i ■''.j \ f 'I-':',' - X'- : ‘ 'V: ^ ■% ■i s.: Station, Vij Sections 143(2), 144(2) of BNS and Sections 3, 41 5, and 7 of the Innmoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "itP Act") j Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Bhar^ava Raju Manthiha Counsel for the Respondent Np.1: Assistant Public Prosecutor Counsel for the Respondent N6.2: The Court made the following: ■'I;'' ' "■ p' t it ' V ;‘i • . 5 ! '% i’ % . ■ 1 APHC010274212025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5617/2025 Between: Chalasani Prasana Bharagav ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) and Others Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.BHARGAVA RAJU MANTHINA Counsel for the Respondent/complalnant(S): 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following order: The present Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, by the petitioner/Accused No.1 for granting of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.67 of 2025 of Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada, NTR District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143(2), 144(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for brevity ‘BNS’) and Sections 3, 4, 5 & 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (for brevity ‘ITP Act’). 2. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that, upon receiving information that illicit activities are being carried out at Studio 9 Building, 3'^'^ Line, Gayatri Nagar, Vijayawada, and as per the instructions of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, a ride was conducted on 21.02.2025. It is further case of the prosecution that the petitioner is the lease holder of the building, who used to get women from Delhi, West Bengal, Tamilnadu, Jharkhand, Telangana and Assam States and running prostitution by engaging them under the guise of Spa Centre along with other accused. 3 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant crime, solely based on the confession statement of the other accused and the report of mediators. It is specifically pleaded that the petitioner was not present at the scene of offence and he has not committed any offence much less the offences, as alleged in the present crime. He would further submit that the victims have filed affidavits before the VI Additional First Class Magistrate, Vijayawada, stating that they did not provide any names to the Police and the name of the petitioner was added by the Police themselves based on mediator’s report. The counsel for the petitioner further draws the attention of this Court to the Section 15 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention Act, 1956) and contended that before making such report, the police did not follow the procedure contemplated under Section 15 (2) of the Act, 1956. 4. Per contra, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor strenuously contended that the petitioner is a habitual offender having antecedents of involving in similar crimes. In support of his contention, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that Crime No.415 of 2022, on the file of Krishan Lanka Police Station Claris* 4 ! and Crime No. 102 of 2024, on the file of Machavaram Police Station, were registered against the petitioner for similar offences. He would further submit that the investigation is not completed and in the event of release of the petitioner, it would be difficult for the Police to secure his presence. 5. Having considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel and taking into consideration of gravity of offences alleged against the petitioner and his involvement in similar offences before the police stations, this Court is not inclined to allow the present application. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any shall stand closed. SdKMSRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR it SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To 1. The Station House Officer, Krishnalanka Police Station, NTR District. 2. The Station House Officer, Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada City, NTR District. 3. One CC to Sri Bhargava Raju Manthina, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CC's to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies BSV (gsg) i-ij V,. -L HIGH COURT I'vt - DATED:27/06/2025 r ffYyl ; r' ORDER eg 18 SEP 2025 Ml C^SQirrent Sectio|x^;^ 0. CRLP No.5617of 2025 n f- \ ?■ DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION