.,.se,:;,i;=±. J++ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE : PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PE"TION NO: 10313 OF 2025 Between : Shaik Chand Basha, S/o. Late Mali Basha, aged about 30 Years, D.No.15/147-A, Appayapalli Village; Kamalapuram Mandal, YSR ( D,'strict AND +*rfe* £g I) Petitioner/Accused No.2 The State ofAndhra Pradesh, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, Through chinna chowk u/G Police Station, Kadapa, YSR (Kadapa) District High Court I+ of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. Respondent Petition under Sections 480 and 483 of BNSS, 2023 is filed praying that n the circumstances stated in the ,grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail ih connection with the F.I.R.No.263 of 2025 oh the file of Chinna Chowk U/G Police Station, Kadapa, YSR (Kadapa) District. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Shaik Mohammad lsmaiI Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING \ •£9 Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.103rs of 2O25 Dated 08.10.2025 The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity [the BNSS'), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail in Crime No.263 of 2025 of Chinna Chowk U/G Police Station, YSR Kadapa District, was registered against the petitioner/Accused No.2 herein for the offences punishable under sections 143 (1)(f),143 (2) readlwith 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity 'the BNS') and Section 3(1), 4(1), 5(1)(a), 6(1)(a) of the Prevention of Immoral Trafficking Act, 1956. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 06.09.2025 at about 5:15 P.M., on credible information regarding prostitution at the house, the Inspector of Police, Chinna Chowk U/G Police Stall-On, along With Staff rushed tO D.No.36/263-8, Sai Narasimha Colony, Chinna Chowk U/G Police Station limits, Kadapa, obtained search proceedings from the SDPO, Kadapa, and; along with mediators and women staff, entered the premi;es. The police found A-1 running the brothel; A-2 in the hall; A-3 and Lw-2 in a bedroom; and Lw-2 in another bedroom with condoms on the bed. A-1 confessed to operating the brothel, collecting Rs.3,000/-per customer and paying Rs.1,000/-to the \-`_ r-_ + ` Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.10313 of 2025 Dclted 08.10.2025 women as commission. Based on her confession, the police seizecI Rs.2,000/- in cash, two Vivo mobile phones, 10 condoms, and other items. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Mr. Shaik Mohammed lsmail, learned Counsel forthe Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking him to the commission of the crime. lt is contended that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and his arrest would cause undue hardshI-P and Prejudice tO hI|S dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any condition that this Court may impose while grantI-ng bail tO the Petitioner. 4. It is further submitted that the petitioner has a permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of his absconding or evading the process of law. The PetI-tiOner has cooperated With the investigation thus far and assures continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant further custodial detention, and if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE.I 5. Per confra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor strenuously opposed to grant of bail and prosecution further apprehend that -_-- |= i| Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.10313 of 2025 Dclted 08.10.2025 the Petitioner, if released, may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby obstructing the course of justice. lt is also urged that there exists a real and imm'lnent risk of the Petitioner absconding and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the progress of the investigation, i{ is submitted that the Petitioner does not deserve the discretionary relief of bailand. it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 7. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration is: "Whether the Petitioner 'IS entitled for grant of bail?" ANALYSIS: 8. As seen from the record, the petitioner was arrested on 06.09.2025 and he hast been in judicial custody for the past 32 days. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Appayapalli Village-, Kamalapuram Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, and he has'got fixed abode. lt will take considerable length of time for the learned Trial Court to take up the matter and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Until such time, keeping the petitioner in judicial Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.10313 of 2O25 Dc,ted O8.1 a. 2025 custody would not serve any purpose. lf certain conditions are imposed, the presence of the petitioner during the trial would be secured and the interest of justice would be sub-served. The charge sheet has already been filed. All the witnesses of the prosecution are official witnesses. Hence, the question of the petitioner influencing or threatening the witnesses or hampering the investigation may not arise. 9. Considering the period of 'detention undergone by the Petitioner/Accused No.2, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the Petitioner, and his alleged role played in the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioner/accu.sed No.2 on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only), wI-{h two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned ll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kadapa. ii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the !earnecl the Trial Court. Dr. YLR, I crI.P.No_10313 of 2025 Dc,ted 08.1O.2025 _~---_-I iii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not leave the limits of the state of Andhra Pradesh without Prior Permission from the station House Officer concerned. iv. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not commit Or indulge in commission of any offence 'ln future. v. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not, directly Or indirectly, 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 POI-lee officer. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. •\ul. Ji SD/-M.SRINIVAS lSTRAR OFF]CEP\ //TRUE COPY// I To, 1. The ll Addit|lonal Judicial Magistrate of let class, Kadapa 2. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. 3. The SHO, Chinna Chowk U/G Police Station, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District 4. One CC to Sri Shaik Mohammec! Ismail, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court ofAncihra Prac!esh [OUT] 6. One spare copy HIGH COURT DR.YLR, J DATED: 08/10/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.10313 of 2025 ALLOWED