BREAKING | Telangana High Court Declines Interim Protection From Arrest To Bandi Bageerath In POCSO Case

In a hearing spanning over two and half hours and nearly touching the midnight mark, the Telangana High Court on Friday (May 15) refused to grant interim protection from arrest to Bandi Sai Bageerath, son of Minister of State for Home Affairs and BJP leader Bandi Sanjay Kumar, who is booked in a POCSO case. 

As the hearingdrew to the close the court orally said that it had thought of passing an order however given the volume and the materials in the matter it would not be able to pass an order at the moment. 

"I thought of passing an order today. The volume of case laws and so many materials, given... I cannot pass an order," the court orally said. 

To which the petitioner's counsel acknowledged that the hearing had gone on late and requested that till the order is passed the police be directed not to arrest the petitioner in the meanwhile, adding that stringent conditions may be imposed. 

Justice T Madhavi Devi after hearing the parties orally said, "I have gone through the statement of victim though not in detail but cursorily, and at this stage I'm not inclined to grant any interim order". 

The petitioner's counsel thereafter requested that the the court may consider passing the final order at the earliest. 

A detailed copy of the order is awaited. 

At the outset of the hearing, the court orally said, "Before hearing you...There has been a smear campaign on social media…I am really pained by it. There has been imputation that something has been offered or something like that…I'm not shying away from hearing the matter I will pass orders. But this is not done". 

Meanwhile Senior advocate S Niranjan Reddy appearing for the petitioner submitted that such people should be taken to task. "As I am seeing increasingly if this is not going to be stopped...Because no matter can be heard...We as a bar have to stand up". 

The court thus asked the counsel for the complainant if he had any reservations about arguing the case before the court, to which the counsel said that he had no reservations and the court may hear the matter. 

Reddy thereafter argued that that he had specifically referred to cases which granted interim anticipatory bail in POCSO cases adding that in law power was available. Referring to the complaint the senior counsel said that taking each of the allegation for whatever its worth as truth, even then none of the offences under POCSO were aligning with the allegations. 

He submitted that after the FIR was filed, a statement had been given and improvements were made wherein original offence did not allege penetrative sexual assault. 

"If original offence is not alleging penetrative sexual assault, then can it be thought that subsequent improvement evokes any suspicion in your ladyships mind. My lord may grant me that benefit of doubt…please see the jump in terms of gravity by this improvement. Even if improvement was part of original complaint, if surrounding material at that particular time leads to doubt in mind of court, even then…Improvement has happened later after they have been legally advised. So court may have to discard it," he said. 

He argued that the petitioner wanted to cooperate with the investigation and was not seeking quashing but only anticipatory bail. 

Meanwhile the State's counsel submitted that the victim was a minor as of now and said that there was no question of granting the petitioner anticipatory bail in a POCSO case. 

The Counsel for the complainant (mother of the girl) submitted that it was not as if the complaint was bereft of details it infact contained what the girl had told the mother. 

The counsel further opposed the grant of anticipatory bail in respect of the petitioner's influential background, to which the court orally asked, "Your imputation now is because of the position of the father, there is every likelihood...that they are in such a position, an influential position...".The counsel said, "What will be the fear in the mind of the victim...there is fear instilled...what will society think? In case bail is granted, that people of this..."

The court however said that the court is not going to think about what society thinks  and it will only look at the law. Meanwhile the counsel further said that the petitioner was not first time offender and there were two other FIRs against the petitioner. 

On the complainant's argument regarding the petitioner's influential background Reddy in rejoinder submissions said, "I'm complaining of that this political opponents are trying to go after me. If there was influence there would have been no improvements, there would have not been alteration memo. Who makes the improvement? Police makes the improvement...I'm not trying to make allegation I'm trying to deal with allegation that father is an influential person. Circumstances show if father (of petitioner) had used influence as being alleged it would not have worked in this manner". 

On Thursday the court had indicated that it would hear the victim before passing orders in the Bageerath's plea for interim relief. 

Bageerath has moved the high court to grant him anticipatory bail and seeking a direction that he be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with FIR which was registered on May 8 at Petbasheerabad Police Station. In the interim, Bageerath has sought interim anticipatory bail pending consideration of the main petition.

As per news reports, Bageerath has been accused by a minor girl of sexually assaulting her and a case has been registered under relevant provisions of POCSO and BNS.

Notably, the Telangana government has directed the State's DGP to form special teams for a comprehensive investigation into the case registered against the applicant. As per reports, Bageerath has not been arrested yet.

Case title: Bandi Sai Bageerath v/s State of Telangana

Case No: CRLP 7805/2026