Bandi Bhageerath, son of Union Minister of State for Home Affairs Bandi Sanjay Kumar, was sent to 14-day judicial custody on Sunday, 18 May 2025 in a POCSO case registered at Pet Basheerabad Police Station, Hyderabad — even as his legal counsel publicly disputed the Cyberabad Police's characterisation of the development as an arrest. The case has drawn national attention given Bhageerath's political lineage and the gravity of the charges.

The Legal Dispute: Arrest or Voluntary Surrender?

Bhageerath's counsel, Karuna Sagar, maintained on Sunday that his client had voluntarily surrendered before the SOT Cyberabad Police and fully cooperated with investigators. “The attempt to portray a voluntary appearance and cooperation as an 'arrest' is misleading and creates a false public narrative,” Sagar said, urging the public and media to distinguish between a voluntary surrender and a custodial arrest.

Union Minister Bandi Sanjay Kumar had earlier posted on X on Saturday asserting that his son had not been arrested but had appeared before the police voluntarily, accompanied by two lawyers.

What Cyberabad Police Said

Cyberabad Police Commissioner M. Ramesh offered a sharply different account. According to a police statement issued past midnight on 16 May 2025, an SOT team apprehended Bhageerath near Tech Park, Manchirevula, under Narsingi Police Station limits, and took him into custody at 8:15 pm. He was subsequently shifted to Pet Basheerabad Police Station.

“The accused was produced before the IO, who examined him in the presence of panch witnesses in the PS. The accused admitted to have committed the said offence. Hence, the IO arrested him,” the police statement said. Following a medical examination, Bhageerath was produced before a magistrate, who remanded him to judicial custody.

How the Case Evolved

A complaint was first registered against Bhageerath at Pet Basheerabad Police Station on 8 May 2025, following allegations that he sexually assaulted a minor girl. As the investigation progressed and statements from the victim and witnesses were recorded, the sections of law were strengthened — with Section 64(2)(m) of the BNS and Section 5(1) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act added to the case. DCP Ritiraj of Kukatpally was directed to supervise the investigation, and the victim's statement was recorded before a magistrate under Section 183 BNSS.

Bhageerath had been served a notice to appear before the investigating officer on 13 May 2025 but did not comply, instead sending a letter requesting a two-day extension.

High Court Refused Interim Protection

The developments followed the Telangana High Court's refusal on Saturday to grant Bhageerath interim protection from arrest. Justice T. Madhavi Devi indicated she was not inclined to grant any interim order without first reviewing the victim's statement — a significant signal from the bench ahead of his eventual custody.

Counter-Complaint and Political Backdrop

Bhageerath had also filed a counter-complaint in Karimnagar, alleging that the victim's family attempted to extort ₹5 crore by threatening to implicate him in a fabricated case. The allegation remains under scrutiny. This is a case that sits at the intersection of criminal law, political identity, and institutional credibility — with the police and the accused's camp offering diametrically opposed accounts of the same sequence of events. How the courts resolve those competing narratives will be closely watched.