APHC010667172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12813/2025 Between: 1. CHEELI RAMA CHANDRA PRASAD, S/O RAMA RAO, AGED 43 YEARS, OCC.ASSISTANT-COMMANDANT,R/O D.NO 53-5- 11/1.MADDILAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI. 2. P PYDIYYA, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,LNSPECTOR OFPOLICE ,LLL TOWN POLICE STATION,VISAKHAPATNAM. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. M. SAPTHAGIRI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12813/2025 ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 8Cr.P.C)/under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 8BNSS9) has been filed by the petitioner/Accused No.5, seeking quashment of the proceedings pending against him in FIR No.219 of 2025 on the file of III town Police Station, Visakhapatnam, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143(3), 144(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS, 3(1), 4(1), 5(1)(a) of PIT ACT. 2. Heard Sri M. Sapthagiri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has not committed any offence whatsoever. The petitioner is an Indian soldier and, in the present case, was merely a customer. During a raid conducted by the police at Orchid Wellness & Spa, the petitioner was found on the premises in the capacity of a customer. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that in similar circumstances, this Hon9ble Court in Crl.P. Nos. 6733 of 2021, 2156 of 2022 and 6182 of 2022, by orders dated 29.11.2021, 30.03.2022 and 11.08.2022 respectively, has categorically held that a customer is not liable for prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral 3 Traffic (Prevention) Act. He would further submit that the Hon9ble Division Bench of this Court, in Crl.P. No. 8675 of 2023 and batch, held that a customer can be prosecuted under Section 370A of the IPC only if the facts prima facie disclose that the customer knowingly, or having reason to believe, engaged a trafficked person for sexual exploitation. In the present case, there is no prima facie material to indicate that the petitioner knowingly, or having reason to believe, engaged a trafficked person or a minor for sexual exploitation. In the absence of such material, the essential ingredients of Section 370A of the IPC are not made out. Learned counsel for the petitioner finally submits that continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to a gross abuse of process of law and prays that the same be quashed. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that the investigation in the present case is still at nascent stage. She would further submit that it is a premature stage to determine the role of the petitioner in the present case. Hence, it is not a fit case of quashment, at this stage. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor finally prays for dismissal of the petition. 5. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material placed on record, this Court is of the view that, since the investigation is still at a nascent stage, it cannot be determined at this juncture whether the petitioner was merely a customer who visited the premises or whether he 4 knowingly, or having reason to believe that a minor or a person had been trafficked, engaged such person/minor for sexual exploitation. 6. In that view of the matter, this Criminal Petition is disposed of without causing any prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioner. However, the petitioner is at liberty to raise all such contentions at appropriate stage, if so advised. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 10.12.2025. UPS 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12813/2025 Dated.10.12.2025 UPS 303