[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Telangana High Court
Tallari Murali vs The State Of Telangana on 6 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
WRIT PETITION No.10032 of 2026
Date: 06.04.2026
Between:
Tallari Murali
..Petitioner
And
The State of Telangana, rep. by its
Principal Secretary, Home Department,
Secretariat,
Hyderabad and others
..Respondents
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:-
"...pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly
one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of
the 3rd respondent in sending the Victim Girl No. 2 namely
Gundrathi Pavithra Jyothi to shelter home namely Prajwal
Home at Tukkuguda, in connection with Crime No. 422/2026
and keeping her under detention for days together, as highly
illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the
Constitution of India, consequently direct the respondents to
forthwith take necessary steps for release of the petitioner
from Prajwal Home at Tukkuguda, without reference to
pendency of Crime No.422/2026 and pass..."
2. Heard Sri Ramesh Kadari, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and Sri M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government
Pleader for Home, for the respondents and perused the record.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that on 13.02.2026 at about 4:00 p.m., respondent No.3, acting on
credible information regarding the alleged running of a brothel at
Glam Factor Beauty and Wellness Spa, Madhapur, conducted a
raid along with his team. During the raid, the police apprehended
certain accused persons along with three women, treating them as
victims, and registered FIR No.422/2026, dated 13.03.2026 for the
offences punishable under Sections 143, 144 BNS and Sections 3,
4, and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
4. It is contended that the petitioner is the cousin brother of
Victim Girl No.2, namely Gundrathi Pavithra Jyothi, who was
among those found during the raid. Subsequent to the registration
of the case, she was shifted to a shelter home, namely Prajwal
Home at Tukkuguda, where she has been confined since then. The
said victim had visited the premises solely in search of
employment, having been informed of job opportunities at the spa.
She had no knowledge of any illegal or immoral activities being
carried on there, and before she could even comprehend the
situation, the police conducted the raid and shifted her to the
shelter home.
5. Even assuming, without admitting, any involvement on her
part, she is a major and cannot be detained in a rescue or
protective home against her will. Such continued detention is
arbitrary, unjustified, and violative of her fundamental rights. The
authorities, after completing necessary counseling procedures,
ought to have released her instead of keeping her in prolonged
custody without valid grounds. Her continued stay in the shelter
home is causing serious prejudice to her personal life, particularly
as she is a married woman, and is adversely affecting her dignity
as well as the reputation of her family and matrimonial home.
6. Reliance is placed on a recent judgment of the Bombay High
Court in Xyz vs. State of Maharashtra 1, wherein it was held that
detention of a major victim in a protective home under Section
17(4) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act is impermissible,
especially when such detention is based solely on lack of support
or resources. The Court categorically held that prostitution per se
is not an offence and that victims cannot be forcibly confined
against their will.
7. The continued detention of the petitioner's cousin is illegal
and unsustainable in law. Being a major, she is entitled to exercise
her personal liberty, and her confinement is a clear violation of
constitutional safeguards. The petitioner has no efficacious
alternative remedy and is therefore constrained to invoke the
2026 SCC OnLine Bom 185
extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court under Article 226
of the Constitution of India.
8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on
instructions would submit that on 13.03.2026, the Sub-Inspector
of Police, Madhapur Police Station, received credible information
that certain individuals were engaging women in prostitution
activities under the guise of operating a spa at The Glam Factor
Beauty and Wellness Spa, located on the first floor, Jai Hind
Enclave, Ayyappa Society, Madhapur. Upon obtaining due
permission from the ACP, Madhapur, vide Proceedings
No.8/2026/ACP-Mdpur, dated 13.03.2026, the Sub-Inspector,
along with his team, conducted a raid at the said premises.
During the course of the raid, it was found that the victim,
Ms. Gandrathi Pavithra Jyothi, was being engaged in the
aforementioned illegal activities. Based on the said information
and findings, a case was registered as FIR No.422/2026, dated
13.03.2026 under Sections 143 and 144 of the BNS, along with
Sections 3, 4, and 5 of the PIT Act, and investigation was duly
taken up.
9. During the course of investigation, the victim was produced
before the learned X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Court,
Ranga Reddy District at Kukatpally. As per her request, she was
subsequently sent to a rescue home, namely Prajwal Home, located
at Tukkuguda. The investigation in the above case is currently
ongoing, and upon its completion, an appropriate final report will
be filed before the competent Court. The petitioner has
unnecessarily filed the present Writ Petition against respondent
No.3 on false and baseless grounds. Hence, seeks to dismiss the
present writ petition.
10. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the
case and upon perusing the material available on record, this
Court is of the considered opinion that, at no point of time, has it
been adequately demonstrated as to how the petitioner is related to
the victim girl (No.2). Except for a bare assertion of such
relationship, the writ affidavit does not provide any supporting
explanation or material particulars. Further, the reliance placed
by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the judgment of the
Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Xyz vs. State of
Maharashtra is misplaced, as the facts of the said case are not
comparable to those of the present case. Moreover, the Hon'ble
Bombay High Court has clearly interpreted the provisions,
particularly the subsections of Section 17 of the PIT Act,
emphasizing the powers of the Magistrate to take an appropriate
decision on such matters. In the absence of any substantiated
claim or supporting material, the mere filing of the present petition
by the petitioner, based solely on an unverified assertion of
relationship with the victim girl (No.2), does not merit
consideration by this Court.
11. In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the writ
petition and the same is liable to be dismissed and accordingly
dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail appropriate
remedies as available under law. There shall be no order as to
costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,
shall stand closed.
_____________________
E.V.VENUGOPAL, J
06.04.2026
vsu/spd
