Cr.p.C) and the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Biharl. Accordingly, the

Petition under Section 482 of BNSS praying that r the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, t e High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of hrs rrest in Crime No.99 of 2025 of P.S., CCS, Hyderabad , Registered U/s.61(2), 31j 2), 318(4) 111 BNS. CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13985 of 2025 Between: Pachipala SS Jayanth Krishna,, S/o.Pachipala Phaneer lranath Reddy, Aged ?9 years, Occ. Private Job, H.No.Flat No.B1, Or r rn View Apbrtment, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam. ... Petitior e /Unnamed Accused AND The State of Telangana.,8"p by its Public Prosecutor ligh Court Buildings, Hyderabad. through PS. CCS. Hyderabad. ...Resp :ndenUComplainant Petition under Section 482 of BNSS praying that ir the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal petitio:) l- : High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of his rr .est in Crime No.102 of 2025 of P.S., CCS, Hyderabad , Registered U/s 61(2), 311 2), 318(4), 335, 340, 336, 111 BNS,39(1),40 of the Surrogacy (Regulation) frct 2021 and pass any such other or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem t and proper in the circumstances of this case, in the interest of justice. CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13986 of 2025 Between: Pachipala S_S Jayanth Krishna, S/o.Pachipala Phanee.ri:anath Reddy, Aged. ?9 years, Occ. Private Job, H.No. FIat No.B1, Oce rn View Rp'artmint, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam. ...Petition I tUnnamed Accused AND The State of Telangana,, Rep. by its Public prosecuto.. I iqh Court Buildings, Hyderabad. through PS, CCS, Hyderabad. ...Resp' ndenUComplainant I L Petition under Section 482 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 in the event of his arrest in Crime No.1o1 oI 2025 of P.S., CCS, Hyderabad , Registered U/s.61(2), 316(2), 318(4), 335, 340, 336, 111 BNS, 39(1), 40 of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act,2O21 and pass any such other or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case, in the interest of justice. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri YEIvIMIGANUR SOMA SRINATH REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner in all Crlp's and the Sri C.D.Arun Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent in all Crlps. The Court made the following: ORDER I E, I THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUi ANA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.1397O' 13979, 13985 & 13 )86 of 2025 ORDER: Since the issue involved in all the criminal {.'ril ions :lrc one and the same, the criminal petitions wcre I-r: -rd togelhe r and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. These Criminal Petitions are fl1ed under S-' lion 482 ol Bharati-va Nagarik Suraksha Sanhtta, 2023 {fot s rort 'BNSS') for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, wl-ro i ' an-aved as accused in Crime No. 101, 99, 1O2, 98 ol 2O2:' 'cspectively, before the INSP ADMIN (DD) Police Station, HyclcI:, rarl

3. The brief facts of the cases are thal, I:rsinq or'. :r complaints lodged by de facto complair': t t:; alleging irregularities anci fraudulerlt practices committec ry L.lniversal Srushti Fertility & Research Centre, Secunder';t zrd, :rnd its staff in connection with a surrogacy pr'1) edure, the Gopalapuram Police registered a case in Crime 'i ;s. 156, 154, 157 and 152 of 2025. The cases \,r'ere I utbsequer-rtly ,. I I I I I i 2 SKS,J CrI.P-No.13970 of2025 afld batch transferred to CCS, DD, Hyderabad, u'here it rvere re-registered as Crime Nos. 1O 1, 99, lO2 and 98 of 2025.

4. Heard Sri Y. Soma Srinath Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioncr as u.ell as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

5. Learned counsel for thc petitioncr submitted that the petitioner was not named in the F-lR and had no connection whatsoever with the alleged offences and that the petitioner had been faisely implicated u.,ithout any materiai evidence or specific allegations establishing her involvement. He further submitted that the investigation agency had acted in a mechanical manner without conducting any preliminary enquiry to verify the facts and that the petitioner, being a law, abiding citizen from a reputed family, was unnecessarily kept under judicial custody despite the completion of investigation. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner by allowing these criminal petitions. SKS,J Crl.P. o,1397o , 2025 and batch

6. On the other hand, learned Additional Publ t Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned co- rsel for the petiLioner stating lhat the allegations leveled gainst the petitioner are serious in nature. Further, the inves igation rvas not yet completed. At this stage, granting of pre-a 'fest bail {o the petitioner does not arise. Therefore, he prayei he Court to dismiss these criminal petitions. 7 . In the light of the submissions made by botl the learned counsel and on perusal of the material available rn record, it appears that the offences alleged against the r :t itioner are under Sections 61(2), 316(2lr, 318(4), 1 1 1, 335' :3ri , and 340 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Sections ,9( 1) and 4L) of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2O21- Thoupl the offencc under Section 111 of BNS is invoked against ti : petitiolrer, admittedly, no charge sheet has been fi1ed hou.ing the petitioner as an accused. As such, at this stage, ir: cannot be said that Section 1 1 1 of BNS ts pima facie at t rcted to the petitioner.

8. Having regard to the nature of the allegati I is, the stage of investigation, and the fact that the remainin 3 offences are punishable with less than seven (7) years, this ()r Llrt deems it t I : I f ll' I 4 sr(s,J Crl.P.No.13970 of 2025 and bstch fit to direct the Investigating Officer to lollow the due procedure as contemplated under Section 3S(3) of the BNSS (corresponding to Section 4i A of Cr.p.C) and the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Biharl. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Ofhcer immediately upon his release from judicial custody in the other crimes and on such appearance, the Investigating Officer shall serve notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS and permit the petitioner to submit his defence and co operate with the investigation b1, furnish ing the required information and documents. The Investigating Officer shall consider the same and proceed in accord4nce with law before filing an appropriate report before the learned Magistrate concerned.

9. Accordingiy, these Criminal petitions are disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. r@S{saffi- To Sd/. C. DEEPIKA ISTANT RE GISTRA //TRUE GOPY// ECTION OFFICER 1 2 TheXllAdditionalChiefMetropolitanMaigsrateatNamapllyHyderabad. The Station House Officer, Gopalapuram Police Station' Hyderabad City' TwoccstothePublicProsecutor,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hyderabad [OUT] I I

4. One CC to SRI YETUMIGANUR SOTUA SRINATH REDtr' , Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies N\,-Bi pr Y+- .: '!r:r /,/ I HIGH COURT DATED:1 111112025 .a' /. .-. '-1.-,.- 2 0 t-; 'iirfi .(1{ n ORDER CRLP.Nos.13970, 13979, 13985 and 139 ]6 of 2025 DISPOSING THE ALL CRIMINAL PET|Trrl1,,1t S) ""R'*W