CRLP/10555/2026 of Vallupu Priyanka Vs The State of Telangana on 21 July 2026

: ORDER :

This Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused No.4 in Crime No.25 of 2024 of Cyber Crime (TSCSB) Hyderabad Police Station, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 506, 370(3), 342, 386, 419, 420 r/w.Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code and 66-D of Information and Technology Act 2000-2008.

2. The case of the prosecution is that Accused Nos.1 and 2, in conspiracy with Chinese nationals and other accused, induced the de facto complainant, by promising him employment as a computer operator in Cambodia, collected money from him towards visa and travel arrangements, and sent him to Cambodia. After reaching Cambodia, the complainant was allegedly handed over to Chinese nationals, forced to work in a cyber fraud call centre instead of the promised job, his passport was confiscated, and he was threatened with dire consequences if he attempted to leave or disclose the activities. It is further alleged that money was extorted from him by putting him in fear of death. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the present petitioner/A-4 had been frequently visiting Cambodia and was voluntarily working in Chinese-operated cybercrime call centres involved in organized cyber fraud targeting Indian citizens. The prosecution further alleges that although the petitioner had returned to India on 19.08.2024 and was counselled by the officials of TGCSB, Hyderabad, not to associate with such organizations or revisit Cambodia, Myanmar, or Laos, she allegedly violated the said undertaking by travelling back to Cambodia on 17.12.2024 and continued to work in the cyber fraud network. On her subsequent return to India, she was apprehended by the Immigration authorities and was remanded to judicial custody on 04.06.2026.

3. Heard Sri R. Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, having no role in the alleged offences. It is submitted that the allegations in the FIR and the complaint do not disclose any material connecting the petitioner with the commission of offence and that the prosecution has unnecessarily arrayed her as A.4. It is further contended that, as per the remand case diary, the petitioner was required only for the purpose of recording her confessional statement. Since petitioner has been in judicial custody from 04.06.2026, her statement has already been recorded, the material witnesses have been examined, and the investigation, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, is substantially complete, as such, her further detention is not necessary. The learned counsel further submits that A.1 and A.2 have already been enlarged on bail and that the allegations against the petitioner are not graver than those levelled against them. Hence, prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application contending that the petitioner is actively involved in the alleged offence and had participated in threatening and coercing Indian nationals to work in cybercrime call centres engaged in various online frauds, including investment frauds and digital arrest scams. It is further submitted that, if petitioner is released on bail, she may tamper with the prosecution evidence, influence witnesses, and indulge in similar offences. As such, petitioner is not entitled to bail and prayed to dismiss this petition.

6. Considering the submissions made and perusal of the material available on record, it is seen that petitioner has been in judicial custody since 04.06.2026. Having regard to the date of registration of crime, the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner as well as the progress in investigation, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five

Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the VI- Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad.

ii. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO between 09.00 a.m and 5.00 p.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.

iii. The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 483(2) of the BNSS.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date : 21.07.2026 Rds

THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.10555 OF 2026

DATE : 21.07.2026

Rds