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

In a hearing which spanned over two and half hours nearly touching the midnight mark, the Telangana High Court on Friday (May 15) refused to grant interim protection from arrest anticipatory bail 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.

Justice T Madhavi Devi after hearing the parties in a hearing which ended around 11:45 pm 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".

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.

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

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 had 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 said that it was not shying away

A detailed copy of the order is awaited.

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

During the hearing on Thursday Senior Advocate S. Niranjan Reddy appearing for Bageerath argued that the relief can be granted even while awaiting the victim's response.

He claimed that the complaint against Bageerath is "completely false" and urged that an interim relief of protection from arrest be granted till the anticipatory bail plea is heard. "If they take me into custody my anticipatory bail will be infructuous," Reddy said.

The senior counsel further submitted that there is no bar against grant of anticipatory bail under POCSO Act, unlike the SC/ST Act. "Parliament did not think that anticipatory bail should be barred. Court may consider on own merits," he submitted.

He further pointed out that the presumption of guilt under Section 29 of POCSO Act applies only after charges are framed, and not at stage when court is considering anticipatory bail. "Parameters will be of a regular IPC offence in anticipatory bail also," he argued.

He also stressed upon the conduct of parties, especially in the cases where the victim is older: "One feature is, it would matter a great deal to see conduct of either parties...point settled by your lordships is, in relation to POCSO if a child is...15-18 years...it would still be case of POCSO, if a case of POCSO is made out, but there conduct of victim becomes extremely relevant. Your lordships have said that it would be a mitigating factor at bail stage itself...".

He said that whenever the court hears the main matter (anticipatory bail) the petitioner would be in the meantime entitled to grant of protection.

At this juncture, the victim's counsel sought time to file a detailed counter, hear the matter at length and opposed grant of interim protection from arrest. He said that "interim protection is as equal to anticipatory bail".

"My question is you seem to have said in (bail) petition that she is not a child below 18; so are you trying to make out that it is not a POCSO case at all? If that is so, then come directly to that point where you have any evidence that she is more than 18 (years). You will also have to satisfy that how are you different and why should any interim protection be granted to you...You should show what is urgency in your case that you should be granted this…," the court orally asked Bageerath's counsel.

To which Reddy said, "I am not different from anyone. I'm entitled to seek your lordships indulgence as any other person who comes become this court and makes a request...there is nothing important or special about this person. This person is as common as any other person". The court then asked as to circumstances why petitioner needed protection.

He pointed out that there is scope for doubting that the victim is, in fact, a minor and also that there has been considerable delay in preferring the complaint (on May 8) since the last incident allegedly happened in December 2025.

"In a POCSO case the case is predicated on age of victim...In a chargesheet filed by police in relation to an earlier incident, police had identified age of victim about 5 years back as 15 years old. If police chargesheet is correct in underage driving case showing victim's age as 15 years at relevant time driving a car...then there is reason for court to have some suspicion if victim is a minor at the time when the alleged incident is referred....," Reddy said.

He said that the birth certificates that are placed showed different birth certificates of the victim taken from different entities and thus there was confusion regarding age of the victim.

The victim's counsel pointed out that Bageerath is absconding and there is no urgency for granting interim bail.

"Father of boy is a Minister...how is it that his application is separate from all other applications? What is urgency? He is absconding. Its not that he is in illegal custody..." he added and sought time to argue the application as well stating that the application was not different from 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