Published May 17, 2026 | 10:35 AM ⚊ Updated May 17, 2026 | 10:35 AM
Bandi Sai Bageerath, accused of sexually assaulting a minor.
Synopsis: The script of the Union minister, whose son was arrested in a POCSO case, whether authored by himself or guided by others, has gone horribly wrong. The political wall he built over many years was being dismantled brick by brick, minute by minute.
An old saying goes that one commits only suicide and that there are no murders in politics.
This seems to perfectly apply in the case of Union Minister of State XXXXXXXX, whose son was accused under POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) and finally surrendered/arrested late in the night on Saturday, 16 May, after eight days of intense people’s campaign.
Now that the issue has reached some sort of finality with whatever twists and turns it could take in the days to come, a deeper analysis of the events from 8 May (when the FIR was registered) reveals that the minister’s script, authored by himself or guided by others, has gone horribly wrong.
Also Read: Telangana police arrest Bageerath, MoS Bandi Sanjay says son surrendered
Let’s go step by step:
1) Imagine the minister handing over his son to the police the day after the case was booked. He might have gotten away with a case under Sections 11 and 12 (as mentioned in the original FIR before the Sections were altered to the rigorous 5 and 6). A case under Section 11/12 would have also provided a window of opportunity to secure a quick bail.
More importantly, the minister’s image would not have been dented, and so badly. It is more than likely that the very people who ran a relentless social media campaign against him would have said, “Why hold the father responsible for his son’s deeds. He respected the law.”
2) Instead, the minister used social media and public platforms to launch a tirade against his rivals, threatened them with dire consequences and declared his son innocent.
3) The reason for this, as the minister himself admitted on Saturday, was the initial guidance he received from legal experts (sadly, including some allegedly within the judiciary) that getting an anticipatory bail under Sections 11 and 12 was very much possible and, therefore, the accused need not surrender. “Why do you want to destroy the boy’s career by getting him arrested?” was what a judicial functionary told him.
4) Within two days, the relevant sections were altered to 5 and 6, which could potentially result in imprisonment up to 20 years. This is where curious developments happened.
5) The anticipatory bail was first placed before a particular judge who suddenly recused himself. Then the matter came up before Justice Madhavi, who too came under attack on social media for her alleged “leanings towards the BJP”. Before commencement of the hearing, the judge sought to know if she should hear the plea because she was pained by the “smear campaign”.
6) Even at this stage, the minister’s camp firmly believed that they would secure an anticipatory bail because the original complaint given by the victim’s mother does not explicitly allege “penetrative sexual assault” as described under Section 5/6.
7) Then came the twist, almost towards the fag end of the hearing on 15 May, in the form of a statement given by the survivor under Section 161 of CrPC. The prosecutor, who did not wish to publicly read out the relevant paragraphs, requested that the judge go through them. “Having read parts of the statement, I cannot give any interim protection,” the judge said.
Between 8 May and 15 May, when the bail was denied, many BJP leaders to whom South First spoke wondered why the minister was trying to hang himself with a new rope every day with his utterances.
The smear campaign against the victim by his followers in the form of photos and videos, the stories being planted in the media that she was not a minor but a major (eventually proved that she is indeed a minor), did not help his cause. The political wall he built over many years was being dismantled brick by brick, minute by minute.
At least two high-ranking functionaries, one from the BJP and the other from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), reportedly spoke to the minister and cautioned him against commenting on the case. “You are not known to listen to sane advice from any of us,” was how one of them ticked him off.
It was also clear from the statement issued by the minister after he claimed to have handed over his son to the police that they expected to get bail and, therefore, preferred not to appear before the police.
Read differently, the accused was perhaps relaxing in the home of his friends or relatives. The minister and son were said to have been constantly in touch.
Also Read: Hyderabad court orders deletion of defamatory content against Bandi Sanjay
Looking at it differently, is it not a reflection on the Telangana police? All the theories they floated about the whereabouts of the accused not being known, that his call data was being monitored, that special teams were set up, etc., were plain bullshit. Like the minister, they also waited until the high court gave its opinion and then woke up to the reality that they had to act.
The question is whether an ordinary citizen, similarly accused in the eyes of the law, would receive such benevolence from the police that they would give ample time to secure relief from the courts.
In one sense, the minister deserves some pity for not even “managing” the surrender of his son. When all doors were shut and left without any options, he did dial the police to inform them that his son would surrender. This was independently verified from multiple sources.
Bruised and battered on social media for their approach towards the case, the Telangana police did not want to give him that benefit. Instead, he was asked to await instructions. And then the drama of “searching multiple locations” was enacted before officially declaring an arrest. Can there be bigger damage than police entering the residence of a Union Home Minister, not to salute him but to search for his son?
The tweet that he put out Saturday evening about the surrender of his son should have come hours before, when he made the decision and conveyed it to the police. He would have at least salvaged some respect.
Having offered all possible support from behind all along, the government and the police ditched the minister at the crucial moment by sabotaging his plan.
