Hyderabad: In a firm reiteration of due process, Telangana high court has ruled that police cannot unilaterally seal or attach properties in cases involving alleged immoral activities, ordering the immediate de-sealing of a guest house in Guttala Begumpet, Madhapur. The guest house had been sealed by Cyberabad police after a prostitution racket was busted in Aug 2025. Pronouncing the order recently, Justice EV Venugopal said that even in cases involving allegations like prostitution, authorities must act strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed under law. The case arose after a raid on alleged prostitution racket being operated from a five-storey building owned by the petitioner. Police registered a criminal case and the building was later attached and sealed. Justice Venugopal said that under section 18 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, the authority to issue a show-cause notice and pass orders for attachment or eviction was vested in the magistrate and not in the police. Further noting that the police had acted beyond their jurisdiction in initiating such proceedings, the judge observed that ownership of a building by itself did not establish that the owner had consented to or was aware of the acts allegedly committed by tenants. The court further noted that police had not established the petitioner’s conscious knowledge of the alleged activities. Aggrieved by the attachment, the petitioner who approached the high court contended that he had leased out the property in 2024 to tenants for running a hostel and had no knowledge of, or connection with, any alleged illegal activity. He alleged that while he was the lawful owner, depended on the property for his livelihood, the police, violating his constitutional rights, sealed the premises without issuing notice to him, and that the show-cause notice issued much later by the commissioner of police was without legal authority. Public orderDefending the police action, state counsel argued that the attachment was necessary as a preventive step in the interest of public order and morality. The building, being used as a brothel, had to remain sealed till completion of the criminal trial so that further illegal activity could be prevented, he contended.Holding that the sealing could not be sustained as the statutory procedure had not been followed and the competent authority under the Act had been bypassed, the court directed the respondents to de-seal the premises forthwith and restore possession to the petitioner. The court also left it open to the competent magistrate to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law, if warranted, and disposed of the petition.
