Batta Veera Venkata Durga Prasad Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

■V

✓

JJ369 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL ■0M .V TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

.V
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY AND TWENTY FIVE :0 C,.
:PRESENT; i ''I
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA MALLIKARJUNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3474 OF 2025 -
■V

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA MALLIKARJUNA

¶6

Between:

¶7

Batta Veera Venkata Durga Prasad, S/o Venkata Ramana, Aged 32 years, Hindu, Resident of Flat No.GF-1, Anantharama Residency^f Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam. Petitioner

¶8

AND

¶9

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Public Prosecutor Through the SHO, II Town Police Station Visakhapatnam, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi.

¶10

Respondent ^ Petition under Sections 482 of BNSS (old 438 of Cr.P.C) 1 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail, in the event of arrest i in connection with Crime No. 192/2024, dt. 12.7.2024, on the file of the II Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam District.

¶11

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri SESHU KUMAR NALI, Advocate for the Petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent and the Court made the following;

¶12

APHC010129902025

¶13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶14

[3369]

¶15

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶16

PRESENT

¶17

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO

¶18

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3474/2025

¶19

Between:

¶20

Batta Veera Venkata Durga Prasad

¶21

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶22

AND

¶23

The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

¶25

1.SESHU KUMAR NALI

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

This Criminal Petition, u/Sec.482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner, seeking anticipatory bail, in Crime No.192/2024 of II Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate.

¶30

A case has been registered against the petitioner and^othersforthe offence punishable u/Sec.143(3) of B.N.S and Section 3(2)(a) and 4(2)(b) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

¶31

2

¶32

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned^Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State.

¶33

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, the Inspector^of II Town Police station, Visakhapatnam city received credible information on 12.7.2024 at 7.00 pm that about procuring women through “findbestclass.com” website for doing prostitution in Room No.101, Siri Grand Hotel, 1®‘floor, Prema Plaza, Suryabagh, Visakhapatnam City and he secured the mediators and proceeded to the place^andfoundtwo women and on seeing police, they tried to escape. Then police apprehended them and on enquiry, they disclosed their identity particulars. On search, police did not find anything incriminating in the room. On verifying the cell phones of the said two woman, who are the victims, said Inspector of police found the cell phone^numbersofone Punjabi lady i.e. A1 and further on checking their whatsapp found three photos were sent to others. Mediators report was drafted and registered the same as a case in cr.No.192/2024 of II Town police station. Visakhapatnam City. 5. Heard. Perused the record.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that according^tothe case of the prosecution only basing on the CDRs, the petitioner is arrayed as an accused and there is no direct involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the offence and prays to allow the criminal petition.

¶35

( i

¶36

3

¶37

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is at crucial stage in this case and prays to dismiss the^{criminalpetition.} 8. As seen from the material available on the record, basing on the statement of co-accused, the case came to be registered against the petitioner. According to the prosecution case, the^{CDRs collected during} the investigation discloses that the present petitioner^{contactedwiththe} main accused and other accused, simply because the petitioner being a cab driver, he might have come in contact with several persons. Simply because he contacted with the prime accused, in the^absence of any allegations and involvement of the petitioner in the^commission of the crime, he cannot be arrayed as an accused. It seems^that except^call data, prosecution has not collected the material as^{towhatwasactually} conversed between them. In absence of such material on record, this Court found that it is doubtful with regard to the participation of the petitioner in the commission of the offence. When ascertained,^learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there are no antecedents reported against the petitioner. 9. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the concerned police station within a period of two (02)^{weeksfromthedate} of receipt of a copy of the order and on his surrender the petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two^{suretiesforalike}

¶38

4

¶39

sum each to the satisfaction of the petitioner shall arresting police officials and the make himself available for i 'uvestigation as and when required and he shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesse*? Officer concerned on ' noerned on eveor Sunday between 10.00 a. and 12 00 noon for Penod of two (02) months. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶40

To.

¶41

SO/. V.SAVITHRI GOWRi ASSISTANT //TRUE COPY// istrar Fc section ^ficer

¶42

Fc

¶43

T The Sessions Judge. Mahila Court, Visakhapatnam 2. The Station House Officer, District II Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam

¶44