The High Court · 2025

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail on any conditions rn Crime No. 14712025 P.S. Gopalapuram and to pass This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K B RAMANNA DORA Represented by C. RAGHU Senior Counsel ,Advocate for the Petitioner and the Publc Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Sole Respondent. CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12071 OF 2025 Between:

1. Mr.Pachipala SS Jayanth Krishna,, S/o. P Phaneend ranath Reddy, Aged 25 years Occ Advocate R/o,H.No.10-3-l 82, St.Pauls Roa<|, Secunderabad ...PErfl ONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1 . State of Tela Officer, P.S. ngana, represented by Public Prosecutor, through Station House INSP ADMIN (DD)/P S.C.C.S. Hyderabad .RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of C;riminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased toto enlarge the petitioner on bail on any conditions in Cr No 14712025 This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing ':he Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K B RAMANNA DORA Represented by C. RAGHU Senior Counsel, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the So e Respondent. CRIMIN PETITION NO : 12006 0F 2025 Between: 1 Smt. Chitikireddi Kalyani Atchayyamma ALIAS Kalyani alias [ah?lar W-{9 Late. Akula NagarajJ, aged abd[t 40 years, Occ Manager at Srushti Ferti{ity -Branch, Ryo.Flat No.B1, Ocean View Apartment, Centre-Visakha-patn'am MaMranrpeta, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1 State of Telanoana. represented by Public Prosecutor, through Station I louse Officer, P.S. llisP ADMIN (DDyP.S.C.C.S. Hyderabad. ...RESPON DENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS praying that in the circurnstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased toto enlarge the petitioner on bail on any conditions in Cr No 14712O25 This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argurneflts of Sri K B RAMANNA DORA Represented by C. RAGHU Senior Counsel, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Sole Respondent' The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SIJ.'ANA CRIMIITAL PEf,ITION Nos.12O18, 12O71 aad I-2CIO6 of 2025 COMMON ORDER: The present Criminal Petitions have beer hled by the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos. 1, 2, and 3, respectively, seeking bail in Crime No.94 of 2025 c'n the file of Central Crime Police Station, Hyderabad.

2. The brief facts of the case are that tl-rr: case was registered on the basis of a complaint lodged b1 r.he de facto complainant, alleging cheating, fraud, and crimina.. conspirary by accused No.l and her associates at Univt:rsal Srushti Fertility Centre in Secunderabari and Visakhapa[nam. The complainant alleged that after paying approxirnltely Rs.30 lakhs for a surrogacy procedure, she w,as hanclerl cver a baby who was later found, through a DNA test, not to be biologically related to her or her husband. Based on the complaint, Gopalapuram Police registered Crirr.e No.l47 of 2025. During investigation, several accused persons were arested, and the case was later transferred to tht: CCS, DD, i : l I ; I l I I I { J ! : Ij I ! I t I I I I I I 2 sf,Itr, Crl.P.Ito.l2O18 of ,O25..cd brtch Hyderabad, where it was re-registered as Crime No.94 of

3. Heard Sri C. Raghu, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri K. B. Ramanna Dora, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4. karned Senior counset appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners, being law-abiding citizrens, were falsely impticated in the present case arising out of complaints from patients of Universal Srushti Fertility Centre. Accused No. 1, being a doctor with decades of experience in infertility rreatment, and the petitioners' employees, were alleged to have caused irregularities in medical procedures, DNA testing, and surrogary processes; however, the petitioners denied all allegations and claimed that the case was foisted with the intention to tarnish their reputation and harass them_ He further submitted t]rat the petitioners had no personal involvement in the alteged offences beyond performing their professional or / I.a 3 sl(s'J Crl.P.Xo.12018 ,)f 2025 a-Ed betch administrative duties in accordance with law, th:tt no speciirc overt acts were attributed to them, and that th: complaints were part of previously registered crimes vri:h ongoing investigations. He contended that the material part of the investigation was completed. Therefore, he praye'1 the Court to grant bail to ttre petitioners by allowing the se criminal petitions.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Publt: Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by tlle learned cctrnst:l for the petitioner stating that there are serious allegatio nr; against the petitioners and ttrere is a previous cases pendin5i against the petitioners. He further submitted that the invrs;tigation was not yet completed. At this stage, granting rf bail to the petitioners does not arise ' Therefore, he praye J the Court to dismiss these criminal petitions.

6. In the light of tlte submissions madt' by lrcth the learned counsel and a perusal of tJle materiirl available on record, it appears that accused No.l is the prrnte accused in the present case. The investigation is still pt nding and the concerned Investigating Officer is still rr:cording the 4 aKs"' CrLP,fo.l2()la of 2,(,15 r.Ed b.tch statements of the witnesses. At tl.is stage, accused No.1 is not entitled to bail, despite claiming parity with accused No.S, who has only worked as an anesthetist OF Gandhi Hospital since 2023. Further, there are multiple other criminal cases pending against accused No. 1, and considering the severity of the allegations, she cannot be granted bail.

7. With regard to accused No.2, it is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner, who is an advocate, has no direct connection with the alleged offences committed by accused No. I . However, there are specifrc allegations that he was involved in managing the hospital and was aware of the illegal activities carried out by accused No. 1. Given the seriousness of the allegations and his managerial role in the institution, accused No.2 is also not entitled to bail.

8. As for accused No.3, the allegations are more senous. She is alleged to be involved in hospital management arrd implicated in human trafficking. It is further alleged that she acted with criminal intent, engaging in fraud, cheating, breach of trust, extortion, and tralficking of human beings. There is ! I i I I i 5 sxs'J C:d.Pfo.l2ola ol 2I)25 r[d b.tch material on record suggesting her involvemenl in multiple victims, including a case in which a female baby was allegedly given to Smt. Pavittrra Grade, a resident of Tamil Nadu, in Jt:,ly 2025, procured through Reshme Banu via :.ccused No.6. Considering the gravity of these allegations, the ongoing investigation, and the potential risk to victimr; ancl pubiic safety, ttris Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the criminal petitions are devoid of merit and the same are liable to be dismissed.

9. Accordingly, these criminal petitions are di;rnissed Miscellaleous applications, if any pendinll, shall stand closed To, SD/- A.JAYASREE AS{iIISTANTREGISTRAR G( SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// 1 The Xll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,City Cr n-rinal Court,Nampally 2 The Central Jail, Chenchalguda. 3 The Central Crime Policestation, Hyderabad 4 The X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Secur'rcerabad. Secunderabad 5 The Station House Ofticer Gopalapuram Police Station. llecunderabad. 6. One CC to SRI K B RAMANNA DORA Advocate [OPLTC ] 7 One CC to SRI PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Advocate [OF UC] S Two CD Copies w HIGH COURT DATED:0811012025 Co\.tNuU 61zPt=P- D!SMISSED CRLP.No.12O18 ot 2025 CRLP.No.12071 of 2025& CRLP.No.12006 ot 202i ( () , Hf, St4 IE 2 il0'J XE + ispo.: CH gO c. .a I \ o .E c.{d} \\ .* I I