APHC010474762025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9374/2025 Between: Bongu Murali ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9570/2025 Between: Bongu Murali ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: M. Dhana Raju Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: Public Prosecutor The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: These two criminal petitions, which were taken up for hearing analogously, are being disposed of by this common order as the petitioner in both criminal petitions is one and the same. 2 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.9374 and 9570 of 2025 Dated 13.10.2025 2. The Criminal Petitions have been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNSS‟) by the Petitioner/Accused for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime Nos.176 and 169 of 2025 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 143(1, 140(3), 146, 127(4), 308(2), 118(2) read with 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNS‟) and Sections 66C and 66D of the Indian Information Technology Act, 2000 (for brevity „the Act‟). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION IN CRIMINAL PETITON NO.9374 OF 2025: 3. The case of the prosecution is that prior to 10.08.2025 at about 19.00 hrs at Panda Street, Lakshmi Durga Institute, I Town Area, Visakhapatnam, the complainant, a labourer, reported that his son Hemant, a B.Sc. graduate, was deceived by one Bongu Murali Reddy, who promised a computer operator job in Cambodia for Rs.1,70,000. On 02.03.2025, the complainant, his son, and a relative paid the amount at Murali Reddy‟s office, and Hemant travelled with him to Cambodia. There, Hemant was placed in a Chinese company under false pretences, later revealing through distress calls that he had been beaten, sold to a Chinese firm, and forced into cybercrime. He called from the number +855 7163 27805, stating that several Indian youths were similarly exploited. The complainant sought urgent action to rescue his son and dismantle the trafficking network. 3 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.9374 and 9570 of 2025 Dated 13.10.2025 CASE OF THE PROSECUTION IN CRIMINAL PETITON NO.9570 OF 2025: 4. The case of the prosecution is that prior to 30.06.2025, the complainant, who had completed 10th class and ITI, was lured by one Mohammad Altaf Ali of Visakhapatnam with a false promise of a system operator job in Cambodia offering Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/- per month. Altaf collected Rs.1,50,000/- from the complainant and sent him abroad in November 2024. Upon arrival, a Tamil-speaking agent, Shuqi, took his passport and sold him to a so-called software company where he was abused, denied food, and told to pay Rs.22,00,000/- to leave. He was later shifted to another firm, where he met other victims, including one Jayakrishna from Srikakulam, who had been sent by agent Bongu Murali. Eventually, about ten victims, including the complainant, escaped and reached the Indian Embassy in Cambodia, which facilitated their return to India. The complainant sought legal action against Mohammad Altaf Ali, Bongu Murali, and Shuqi for cheating, trafficking, and forcing him into cyber slavery under the guise of employment. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 5. Sri Mallpudi Dhanaraju, learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated, is the sole breadwinner of his family, and any coercive action would cause irreparable hardship. He is a law-abiding citizen with permanent residence, willing to comply with conditions for anticipatory bail, and assures full cooperation with the investigation. 6. Further, there is no recovery linked to the Petitioner, and custodial interrogation is unnecessary. The Petitioner has cooperated with the 4 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.9374 and 9570 of 2025 Dated 13.10.2025 Investigating Officer, with no risk of absconding or tampering with evidence. It is prayed that pre-arrest bail be granted in the interest of justice. ARGUMENTS OF THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: 7. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposes the anticipatory bail, arguing that the investigation is at a critical stage and custodial interrogation is essential to uncover material facts. She submits that granting bail at this point could impede the investigation, as there is concern the Petitioner may not cooperate or may evade the law. The prosecution also contends that the Petitioner might influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, compromising the investigation's integrity. In light of the serious allegations, it is prayed that the application be dismissed to protect the investigative process and ensure justice. 8. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 9. 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 pre-arrest bail?” ANALYSIS: 10. As seen from the record in FIR No.169 of 2025 of the Cyber Crime Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate, the petitioner acted as an agent and sent the victims to Cambodia with the intent of being exploited the victims for illegal cyber slavery through trafficking. The victims were allegedly 5 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.9374 and 9570 of 2025 Dated 13.10.2025 trafficked and forced to engage in illegal transactions through deceitful means, amounting to trafficking and cyber slavery. 11. Further, as per the record in FIR No.176 of 2025 of the same police station, the petitioner is accused of trafficking the de-facto complainant to Cambodia under the pretext of offering lucrative employment, thereby subjecting him to cyber slavery. The investigation is at a nascent stage. Indeed, specific accusations have been levelled against the petitioner. 12. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that approximately twelve criminal cases have been registered against the petitioner, three of which are of a similar nature. It is also submitted that after being granted bail in Crime No.118 of 2024, the petitioner absconded and subsequently committed two more offences, indicating that he is a habitual offender. CONCLUSION 13. In view of the specific overt acts attributed against the petitioner and the specific and serious nature of the allegations, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail. 14. Accordingly, the Criminal Petitions are dismissed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date:13.10.2025. KMS 6 Dr.YLR, J Crl.P.Nos.9374 and 9570 of 2025 Dated 13.10.2025 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION Nos: 9374 and 9570 OF 2025 13.10.2025 KMS