Published Oct 07, 2026 | 2:00 PM ⚊ Updated Oct 07, 2026 | 2:00 PM
Bandi Sai Bageerath, accused of sexually assaulting a minor.
Synopsis: Bageerath argued that the coverage amounted to a media trial and that publishing “defamatory, sensationalised, morphed, AI-generated and unverified” material while the investigation is pending violates Article 21 of the Constitution. He also cited media safeguards in Section 23 of the POCSO Act and the BNS provision against disclosing a victim’s identity.
POCSO case-accused Bandi Sai Bageerath has approached the Telangana High Court for a directive restraining media houses and social media platforms from publishing prejudicial content about the case.
Bageerath, son of Union Minister of State for Home Affairs Bandi Sanjay Kumar, also sought an order to immediately take down morphed and AI-generated images of himself and his family, as well as posts identifying the survivor in the case.
The writ petition, filed on Tuesday, has yet to be listed. It names 61 respondents, including the Union and Telangana governments, Google, Meta, X Corp and over 50 broadcast channels, digital news channels, and journalists.
Bageerath argued that the coverage amounted to a media trial and that publishing “defamatory, sensationalised, morphed, AI-generated and unverified” material while the investigation is pending violates Article 21 of the Constitution. He also cited media safeguards in Section 23 of the POCSO Act and the BNS provision against disclosing a victim’s identity.
The petition sought that authorities remove, block, and deindex the offending posts, videos, and URLs under Section 69A of the IT Act. It also called for the Information and Broadcasting Ministry and MeitY to examine alleged violations of the Programme Code under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act and the IT Rules. If warranted, the petition prayed that licences of erring broadcasters be suspended or revoked.
Also Read: The reasoning behind Telangana High Court granting bail to Bandi Bageerath
Bageerath further questioned how the investigation material reached the media and asked news organisations to disclose their sources.
He requested the court for a directive to the DGP to inquire into the leaks and act against those responsible. Bageerath sought directions for the police to follow the Union Home Ministry’s 2010 office memorandum on dealing with the media. He also wanted channels to adhere to the Programme Code, Press Council norms, and the Bombay High Court’s guidelines in Nilesh Navalakha v. Union of India.
Besides the governments and tech corporations, the respondents included Telugu news channels TV9, TV5, ABN Andhra Jyothy, Sakshi, NTV, 10TV, RTV, Eenadu Zee Telugu, T News, and HMTV. The petition also named several smaller channels and digital media houses, including Mahua Media, Aadya TV, Mana Toli Velugu, Prashna, Kaloji TV, and Pulse TV, as well as independent journalists Thulasi Chandu and Revathi, as respondents.
Also Read: Telangana police arrest Bageerath, MoS Bandi Sanjay says son surrendered
Along with the writ, the petitioner filed five interim applications seeking urgent orders, including three injunction petitions and two direction petitions. The first, an injunction, asked the court to bar any fresh content declaring him guilty, running a parallel investigation, or airing speculative reconstructions or alleged confessional statements. It would also bar anything that enables the survivor’s identification.
The second interim application sought a John Doe/Ashok Kumar order restraining the social media platforms and media houses from publishing such content, and directions for the channels to take down information when flagged by the petitioner or his advocates.
The third petition sought to restrain all respondents from speculating on the content of the chargesheet in the case. The fourth asked for directions to immediately remove and block already published content, specifically the alleged morphed and AI-generated images of the petitioner and his family members, and any content identifying the survivor.
The final petition asked for a directive to Google, Meta, and X to preserve digital evidence and electronic records of the alleged offensive content, including subscriber details.
Police registered the case against Bageerath on the night of 8 May.
The girl complained that Bageerath made her consume alcohol and then sexually assaulted her.
The complaint said that Bageerath, aged around 25, had maintained a close relationship with the girl. He allegedly promised to marry her, but later backed out.
After falling out of the relationship, Bageerath’s friends lodged a complaint against the girl, accusing her of intimidation and harassment. It has been alleged that the complaint filed in the Nirmal district in April was an apparent bid to browbeat the survivor.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
