The Telangana High Court, on Friday, declined to grant pre-arrest bail to Union Minister of State for Home Affairs Bandi Sanjay’s son Sai Bageerath in the case registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, while reserving orders in the anticipatory bail petition.

Justice T. Madhavi Devi of the HC, who heard contentions of the parties from 9 p.m. to close to midnight, said that she was “not inclined to grant any interim order at this stage”. The judge, who was on the summer Vacation Bench, said that the order would be pronounced on May 21 (Thursday), when the Bench would resume hearing of cases.

However, with senior counsel S. Niranjan Reddy appearing for Mr. Bageerath, requesting for passing the final order earlier, the judge said that she would consider it. The senior counsel said it was not compulsory that the order be passed only on May 21, when the Vacation Bench of the Judge resumes hearing. The judge said in that case, the order would be passed at the earliest.

Similar cases

The arguments in the anticipatory bail petition continued for the second day on Friday. With the long list of different petitions pending for hearing, Justice Madhavi Devi continued to hear pleas even after 4.30 p.m. Mr. Bageerath’s petition came up for hearing around 9 p.m. with Mr. Niranjan Reddy citing multiple judgments of the Supreme Court and verdicts of some HCs granting bails in POCSO cases.

The senior counsel contended that the victim and his client had a cordial relationship or friendship for a long time and eventually decided to part ways. At the most what the petitioner had done might constitute a case of cheating but would not fall under the category of aggressive penetrative sexual assault as alleged in the FIR.

Advocate Pappu Nageshwar Rao, engaged by the victim’s mother, opposing his contentions, cited verdicts of the apex court rejecting anticipatory bails in POCSO cases. “I had personally spoken with the victim. The girl had undergone trauma,” he said and the question of granting anticipatory bail in POCSO case would not arise.

He referred to a complaint lodged by Mr. Bageerath in Karimnagar town, alleging that the victim’s family demanded money to settle the matter and the latter had transferred ₹50,000 to the victim.

The accused sent money without any reason and the victim had within hours returned the same to the accused, the advocate said. The Public Prosecutor for Home Palle Nageshwar Rao refuted the arguments of petitioner’s counsel that there was an ‘improvement in the FIR’.

The Sections were altered a day after the FIR was issued based on the complaint lodged by victim’s mother.