Guduru Kiran Kumar Reddy @ Kiran Reddy v. The State of Telangana & Anr.

The brief facts of the case are that on 19.05.2026, the de- facto complainant, lodged a report before the Police stating that the owners of certain brick kilns at Maggidi Village, Armoor Mandal had illegally confined several labourers and their family members and subjected to exploitation, physical harassment, and inhumane working conditions without providing basic amenities and that women, pregnant women, and children were also forced to work under such conditions. The complaint was based on a petition submitted by Sri Thupakula Babu and 34 other labourers, who were working in the said brick kilns. Upon receiving the information, the police along with officials of the District Legal Services Authority, Labour Department and Revenue Department, conducted an inspection of the brick kilns at Maggidi Village. During the inspection and subsequent enquiry, the affected labourers and their families were rescued and shifted to Vijayalakshmi Function Hall, Mamidipalli Village, Armoor Mandal, where necessary facilities such as food, water, medicines, and shelter were provided. The enquiry revealed that the allegations were 3 prima facie true and that the labourers and their families had been illegally confined and compelled to work under exploitative conditions without adequate wages, basic amenities or freedom of movement and women, pregnant women and children were engaged in labour under inhumane conditions. As such, requested the police to take necessary action. Based on the said complaint, the police registered a case for the abovementioned offences.

Heard Sri P. Ravindra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for Respondent No.1 - State. Though notice was served on respondent No.2, no one appeared on his behalf.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent of the allegations levelled against them and that there are no averments in the complaint constituting an offence under Section 143 of the BNS. He further submitted that the petitioners were erroneously remanded to judicial custody and have been in custody since 26.05.2026 and that LW.2 has falsely attributed several allegations against the petitioners without proper verification, resulting 4 registration of a false case against them. He further contended that the petitioners did not commit any physical or sexual exploitation as alleged and that a substantial part of the investigation has already been completed, as such their further detention is not required. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioners by allowing this criminal petition.

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, contending that the allegations against the petitioners are serious and grave in nature. He submitted that the petitioners had brought poor labourers from various States, failed to pay them adequate wages and subjected them to physical and sexual exploitation. He further submitted that the investigation is still in progress and that, if released on bail, the petitioners may hamper the investigation. Therefore, granting bail to the petitioners, at this stage, does not arise and prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioners have been in judicial custody 5 since 26.05.2026. As per the remand case diary, prosecution witnesses, namely LWs.1 to 47, have already been examined. It is also evident that all the victims have been sent back to their native places and therefore, there is no likelihood of the petitioners threatening or influencing the victims or witnesses. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the stage of investigation, and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners-Accused Nos.1 and 3, subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge for Trial of Offences under SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum-II Additional Sessions Judge at Nizamabad. ii. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required. 6 iii. The petitioners shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).