APHC010027872026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 428/2026 Between: 1. MURRI ANKITHA ALIAS RUBBY, D/O.M.NAGESWARA RAOAGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,R/O. 59-19-10, HARIJANA STREET, MALKAPURAMVISAKHAPATNAM - 530 011. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep.by Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh,atAmaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtpleased to direct the S.H.O., Cyber Crime Police Station, Visakhapatnam City, Visakhapatnam District, to enlarge the Petitioner on bail, in the event of her arrest, in connection with the Crime No.287 of 2025 on the file of Chinna Bazar Police Station, SPSR Nellore District and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. AKULA VAMSI KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 428 OF 2026 ORDER:- The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioner/Accused No.1 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.124 of 2025 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Visakhapatnam City, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143(1), 140(3), 146, 308(2), 127(4) read with Section 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNS’) and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act, 2000 (for brevity, ‘the IT Act’). 2. Heard Mr.Akula Vamsi Krishna, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.K.Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent - State. 3. The brief case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/A-1, along with A- 2, lured the de facto complainant and others on the pretext of providing high- salary jobs, took them abroad, forcibly collected their passports, and attempted to engage them in cyber crimes, amounting to human trafficking and illegal confinement. Hence, the above crime was registered. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herself is a victim in this case and has no role in the alleged offence. 5. Mr. K. Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, seriously opposed the petition and would submit that the petitioner is not in India. Initially, she 3 went there for employment and later, she turned to be an employer and in that process, she along with A-2 lured the people for the sake of human trafficking and cyber crimes. 6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material available on record, in the light of the nature and gravity of the incident, there is serious dispute regarding her presence in India. In that view of the fact, this Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/A-1 at this stage. 7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to surrender before the concerned Magistrate Court within one (1) week and file an application for regular bail. Upon such application being filed, for regular bail, the learned Magistrate shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. ___________________________________ DR.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 03.02.2026 KA 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 428/2026 Date: 03.02.2026 KA