lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMB TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE Z :PRESENT.I T#HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y, LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9276 OF 2025 of/ Between.I Mogasala Ramesh, s/o. Narasimha Rao, aged about 31 years, R/o. D.No.2-59, Rajeev Nagar, old DaI'ry Farm, vI-Sakhapatnam C['ty, VI-Sakhapatnam District, A.P. ;. ...Pet]-tjoner/Accused No.2 AND The S{a{e of Andhra pradesh, Rep by its pubII[C Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra pradesh. ...Respondent petition under section 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C and section 480 & 483 of BNSS, Its filed prayI-ng that jn the circumstances stated in the grounds filed Ion support of the criminal petition, the Hl-gh Court may b6 pleased to enlarge the petl-tioner/Accused No.2 on bail pending Town P.S., Visakhapatnam District. sal of Crime No.152/2025 of Ill The petition coml-ng on for hearI'ng, upon perusl'ng the petjtI'On and the grounds filed in support thereof a~nd upon hearing the arguments of sri Gollapalli Maheswara Rao, Advocate for the petI-tiOner and of PublI-C prosecutor for Respondent, the court made the followl-ng fjESfi5feZ---i+` ., . - . `-. - APHCO10467092025 Eii± IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY`,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER I TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO I CRIIVIINAL PETITION NO: 9276/2025 Between : Mogasala Ramesh, AND The State Of Andhra Prad6sh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. GOLLAPALLI MAHESWARA RAO [3521] I ...pETmONER,ACCUSED ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the I Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity tthe BNSSI), seek.ing to I enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail in`Crime No.152 of 2025 of lil Town Police Station,I Visakhapatnam District, registerecl for the alleged offence puni;hable under Sections 143(3), 144(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity fthe BNSJ) and 3(1 ), 4(1 ), 5(q )(a) of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956 (for brevity {the Act'). Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9276 of2025 Dated 17.09.2025 CASE OF THE PROSECU"ON: I 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 17.07.2025, the Sub-Inspector of I Ill Town P.S., Visakhapatnam,. received information about a brothel operating at Mini Thai Spa, .Snehandra Building, ,Waltair Main Road. Police, with mediators,. conducted a `raid and found A2, the Manager, on-site. It was revealed that Accused No.1 was running the brothel by recruiting young a women under the guise of beauticians and massage th`erapists for prostitution. Accused No.3, a customer, had pai.d €10,000 via PhonePe for massage and sexual services and was found receiving a massage `from Mannat Khureshi. Police arrested Accused N'o.2 (Manager) and Accused No.3 (Customer), I rescued five victims, and seized three cell phones. . , i CONTENTIONS OF THE COUN'SEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri G. Maheswara Rao, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking him td the commission of the crime. It is contended that the Petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and his arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to his, dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditioh that this Court may - impose while granting bail to the Petitioner. i 4. It is further submitted that the Petitioner has a permanent place of I residence and there is no likelihood of him absconding Or evading the Process i of law. The Petitioner has cooperatec!-with the investigation thus far and I.--- i I + 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9276 of2025 Da-ted 17.09.2025 assures continued cooperation in future proceedings. lt is also urged that the a allegations are of a nature that do not warrant custodial interrogation, and if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition., 4FiGLU_prENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC, PRQSECUTQJ±i 5. Per con{ra, Ms.P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor i strenuously opposed the grant of bail, contehding that the investigation is stI'II underway and several material viitnesses are .to be examined. It is submitted that enlargement of the petitioner on bail at this stage would seriously hamper the progress of the investI'gatiOn and may result in non-cooperation from the Petitioner. The prosecution further apprehends that the petitioner, if released, may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby obstructing the course of justice. lt is also urged that there exists a re'al and imminent risk of the a -PetI|tiOr!er absconding and evading the due process of law. Giv'en the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the pfogre:s. of the investigation, it is I submitted that the Petitioner does not deserve the discretionary relief of baI-land it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: < 6. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the poI'nt for consideration iS.I E'Whe`ther the Petitioner is entitled for grant of bail?99 t=-a .-fl ANALYSIS: t+ 4 Dr.YLR, J I Crl.P.No.9276 of 2025 Dated 17.o9.2025 7. As seen from the record, this is the second bail aPPliCatiO,n filed for the release of the petitioner. Earlier, on 30.08.2025, in Crl.P.No.8777 of 2025, this Court dismissed the first bail application. The learned Assistant Public I Prosecutor submits that L.Ws.8 and 9 have been examined and that there. is a I change in circumstances. The Petitioner is a permaner)I resident of' Rajeev Nagar, Old Dairy Farm, Visakhapatnam City, Visakhapatnam District. CoNCLUSION: 8. Considering facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the petitioner, his alleged role played in this case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with,the following stringent conditions: I-. The Petitioner/Accused No.2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to the ex6cuting a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- I (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties each for I the like sum each to the satisfaction of the lea+lned lV Additional chief JLdicia[ Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. ii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall appear before the Station House Officer, Ill Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam District, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, -till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. I + Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.No.9276 of 2025 Dated 17.09.2025 I iii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. ivI The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall I make themselves available for interrog,ation by the investigating offI'Cer aS and When required. i i vi. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not, directly or ind'lrectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. vii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. lf he claim that he do not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the I Investigating officer. I I 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- '< K. KASiRAO Al~,`,I,AR! ASS!STAN EG!STRAR sE-CTION (JFFICER Tol 1. The Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, VI'SakhaPatnam. 2. The Sup-erI-ntendent, Central Jail, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 3. The Station House Officer, Ill Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam District. 4. One CC to Sri GoIIapaIIi Maheswara Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two cos toPUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P., Amaravati.[OUT] 6. One spare copy. PSD HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATE : 17/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.9276 of 2025 ALLOWED