Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 57746 (AP)

Seekala Lakshmi Devi v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

CRLP/10347/2025 · 2025-10-26

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010531872025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10347/2025 Between: SEEKALA LAKSHMI DEVI, W/O. CHITTI BABU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,R/O. D.NO. 14-559, NEAR RAILWAY GATE,R.S.ROAD, KAMALAPURAM TOWN AND MANDAL, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by its Public Prosecutor,Through Chinna Chowk U/G Police Station,Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: SHAIK MOHAMMED ISMAIL Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: + PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.10347 of 2025 Dated 27.10.2025 The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.’)/ Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail in Crime.No.263 of 2025 of Chinna Chowk Police Station, YSR Kadapa District, registered against the petitioner/Accused No.1 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 143 (1)(f), 143 (2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’), 3(1), 4(1), 5(1)(a), 6(1)(a) of the Prevention of Immoral Trafficking Act, 1956. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. As seen from the record, the allegation against the petitioner/Accused No.1 is that she was running a brothel. After thorough investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is a lady aged about 52 years and is suffering from several health ailments. She was arrested on 06.09.2025 and she has been in judicial custody for the past 50 days. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that three similar adverse antecedents have been 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.10347 of 2025 Dated 27.10.2025 reported against the petitioner, out of which one is under the provisions of ‘the IPC’ and two are under the provisions of the Prevention of Immoral Trafficking Act. In the present case, Accused Nos.2 and 3 have been enlarged on bail. 4. Be that as it may, the petitioner/Accused No.1 is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. In Prabhakar Tiwari v. State of U.P. and others1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that criminal antecedents should not be taken into consideration while considering the application for grant of bail. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the Petitioner/Accused No.1, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject to she executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only), with three sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kadapa. 12020 (11) SCC 648 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.10347 of 2025 Dated 27.10.2025 ii. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every adjournment without fail. iii. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not commit or indulge in commission of similar offence in future. If any offence is reported against the petitioner in the future, the bail granted in this case shall be liable to be cancelled on an application filed by the prosecution. v. The petitioner/Accused No.1 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. 6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 27.10.2025 RSI 5 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.10347 of 2025 Dated 27.10.2025 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.10347 of 2025 Date: 27.10.2025 RSI