{"id":547,"date":"2026-01-04T02:43:44","date_gmt":"2026-01-04T02:43:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/victimsrightsprotectiontrust.com\/?page_id=547"},"modified":"2026-01-04T02:56:27","modified_gmt":"2026-01-04T02:56:27","slug":"pil-on-youth","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/victimsrightsprotectiontrust.com\/?page_id=547","title":{"rendered":"PIL ON Youth"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Why This Public Interest Litigation Is Being Filed<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>

This Public Interest Litigation is born out of pain\u2014pain of parents who sent their daughters away with hope, dreams, and trust, believing education would secure their future, only to see those dreams collapse into fear, shame, police stations, courts, hospitals, and in some cases, cremation grounds. What begins as innocent friendship or love slowly turns into emotional control, lies, isolation from family, unwanted physical exploitation, substance addiction, and criminal entanglement. Many parents realise the truth only when their daughter\u2019s voice changes, when she stops coming home on time, when she abandons her studies\u2014or worse, when a police call shatters the family forever.<\/span><\/p>

This PIL is not against love, freedom, or education<\/strong>. It does not question genuine relationships or adult choices. It questions silence\u2014silence of institutions that notice warning signs but do nothing, silence of authorities who act only after crimes occur, and silence forced upon parents who are made to feel helpless, ashamed, and powerless. Today, vulnerable young girls are being misled in the name of \u201cconsent\u201d and \u201cmajority,\u201d while manipulation, grooming, drugs, and criminal influence destroy their judgment and futures. This PIL seeks protection before punishment, guidance before disaster, and intervention before irreversible damage.<\/span><\/p>

This is a plea from broken families who ask only one thing: save our children before it is too late<\/strong>. It is an appeal to the Hon\u2019ble Telangana High Court to stand as a guardian when families are pushed to the edge\u2014when parents are driven to despair, when siblings are torn apart, and when a young life slips into darkness with no way back. This PIL is about preserving families, protecting students, and ensuring that no parent has to choose between silence and tragedy. It is a call for compassion, responsibility, and timely justice\u2014before another family is destroyed forever.<\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

IN THE HON\u2019BLE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA<\/span><\/h2>

AT HYDERABAD<\/span><\/p>

(PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)<\/span><\/h3>

WRIT PETITION (PIL) No. ______ OF 2026<\/span><\/h3>

BETWEEN:<\/span><\/h3>

Kalle Nagaraja Giri Prasad \/GPS\/ Giri Prasad Sarma<\/strong>,<\/span>
S\/o K. Nagaraju,<\/span>
Age: 54 years,<\/span>
R\/o H. No. 3-4-1005\/6, Barkatpura,<\/span>
Hyderabad \u2013 500027,<\/span>
Profession: Founder, Victims Rights Protection Trust,<\/span>
Mobile No.: 9701609689<\/span>
\u2026\u00a0Petitioner<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

AND<\/span><\/h3>

  1. The Director General of Police<\/strong>,<\/span>
    State of Telangana, Hyderabad.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

  2. The Additional Director General of Police (Law & Order)<\/strong>,<\/span>
    State of Telangana, Hyderabad.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

  3. The State Human Rights Commission<\/strong>,<\/span>
    Telangana, Hyderabad.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

  4. The State Women Safety Wing<\/strong>,<\/span>
    Government of Telangana, Hyderabad.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

  5. The Telangana State Women Commission<\/strong>,<\/span>
    Hyderabad.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

  6. The Hon\u2019ble Minister for Higher Education<\/strong>,<\/span>
    Government of Telangana, Hyderabad.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

  7. The Hon\u2019ble Minister for School Education<\/strong>,<\/span>
    Government of Telangana, Hyderabad.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

  8. The Hon\u2019ble Minister for Home<\/strong>,<\/span>
    Government of Telangana, Hyderabad.<\/span>
    \u2026\u00a0Respondents<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ol>

    WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA<\/span><\/h2>

    FOR ISSUANCE OF AN APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, MORE PARTICULARLY IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS AND GUIDELINES, IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC ORDER, WOMEN SAFETY, STUDENT WELFARE AND PREVENTION OF CRIME.<\/span><\/h3>

    MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:<\/span><\/h3>

    I. STATUS OF THE PETITIONER<\/span><\/h2>

    The Petitioner is a law-abiding citizen of India and the\u00a0Founder of Victims Rights Protection Trust<\/strong>, actively engaged in addressing issues concerning victims of crime, women safety, child protection and family welfare. The Petitioner has no personal interest in the present matter and is filing this petition\u00a0purely in public interest<\/strong>, espousing the cause of vulnerable students, young women and distressed families.<\/span><\/p>

    II. MAINTAINABILITY OF THE PETITION<\/span><\/h2>

    This Writ Petition is maintainable under\u00a0Article 226 of the Constitution of India<\/strong>, as it raises serious issues relating to:<\/span><\/p>

    • Public order<\/span><\/p><\/li>

    • Women and child safety<\/span><\/p><\/li>

    • Failure of preventive policing<\/span><\/p><\/li>

    • Absence of regulatory safeguards in educational institutions<\/span><\/p><\/li>

    • Repeated violation of constitutional duties under Articles 15(3), 21, 39(e), 39(f) and 47<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ul>

      No alternative efficacious remedy exists except the intervention of this Hon\u2019ble Court.<\/span><\/p>

      III. FACTS OF THE CASE<\/span><\/h2>

      1. It is respectfully submitted that an alarming rise is being witnessed in the State of Telangana involving\u00a0young female students<\/strong>, who leave their parental homes solely for educational purposes, but gradually fall prey to:<\/span><\/p>

        • Emotional manipulation and grooming under the guise of friendship and love<\/span><\/p><\/li>

        • Coercive physical proximity, sexual exploitation and substance abuse<\/span><\/p><\/li>

        • Alienation from parents and abandonment of education<\/span><\/p><\/li>

        • Inducement into illegal activities, narcotics consumption and criminal networks<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ul><\/li>

        • Several such cases ultimately culminate in:<\/span><\/p>

          • Criminal proceedings under\u00a0POCSO Act, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, NDPS Act<\/strong>, etc.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

          • Honour-related violence, suicides of parents, and total breakdown of families<\/span><\/p><\/li>

          • Young women becoming accused or victims in serious offences, permanently ruining their lives<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ul><\/li>

          • The misuse of the concept of \u201cmajority\u201d and \u201cconsent\u201d has created a\u00a0legal vacuum<\/strong>, wherein vulnerable young adults are exploited through deception, inducement and coercion, escaping timely preventive intervention by authorities.<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ol>

            IV. FAILURE OF STATE MACHINERY<\/span><\/h2>

            It is submitted that despite existing laws, there is:<\/span><\/p>

            • No\u00a0mandatory preventive framework<\/strong>\u00a0in colleges and universities<\/span><\/p><\/li>

            • No\u00a0early-warning or counselling mechanism<\/strong>\u00a0involving parents<\/span><\/p><\/li>

            • Inadequate use of\u00a0preventive powers under BNSS, 2023<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/li>

            • Lack of coordination between police, education departments and women safety agencies<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ul>

              The response of the State remains\u00a0reactive rather than preventive<\/strong>, resulting in irreparable damage.<\/span><\/p>

              V. CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL POSITION<\/span><\/h2>

              1. Article 21<\/strong>\u00a0guarantees life and liberty, but such liberty is subject to\u00a0reasonable regulation<\/strong>\u00a0to protect vulnerable sections.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

              2. Articles 15(3), 39(e) & (f)<\/strong>\u00a0cast a positive obligation on the State to protect women and children from exploitation.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

              3. The Hon\u2019ble Supreme Court in\u00a0Shakti Vahini v. Union of India<\/em>\u00a0(2018) held that the State must\u00a0prevent social practices leading to violence and coercion<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

              4. In\u00a0Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India<\/em>\u00a0(2008), the Court emphasized balancing liberty with societal realities.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

              5. High Courts of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh have repeatedly observed that\u00a0educational institutions owe a duty of care beyond academics<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ol>

                VI. GROUNDS<\/span><\/h2>

                The Petitioner seeks intervention on the following, among other, grounds:<\/span><\/p>

                A. Because absence of preventive guidelines violates constitutional obligations of the State.<\/span>
                B. Because unchecked exploitation of students threatens public order and social fabric.<\/span>
                C. Because post-crime remedies cannot compensate irreversible damage to families.<\/span>
                D. Because women safety and child protection require\u00a0judicially guided governance<\/strong>.<\/span>
                E. Because failure to regulate grooming, inducement and deception amounts to State inaction.<\/span><\/p>

                VII. PRAYERS<\/span><\/h2>

                In view of the facts and circumstances stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon\u2019ble Court may be pleased to:<\/span><\/p>

                1. Issue a writ of mandamus<\/strong>\u00a0directing the Respondents to frame and implement\u00a0State-wide preventive guidelines<\/strong>\u00a0to protect students, particularly young women, from grooming, coercion, sexual exploitation and criminal inducement.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                2. Direct the Respondents to establish\u00a0mandatory counselling, monitoring and reporting mechanisms<\/strong>\u00a0in educational institutions.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                3. Direct strict enforcement of\u00a0POCSO Act, BNSS, NDPS Act and allied laws<\/strong>, even in cases involving apparent consent where vulnerability and inducement are evident.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                4. Direct constitution of a\u00a0multi-departmental task force<\/strong>\u00a0involving police, education authorities and women safety agencies.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                5. Direct issuance of\u00a0standard operating procedures (SOPs)<\/strong>\u00a0for preventive police intervention under BNSS.<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                6. Pass such other order(s) as this Hon\u2019ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice.<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ol>

                  VIII. INTERIM PRAYER<\/span><\/h2>

                  Pending disposal of the Writ Petition, this Hon\u2019ble Court may kindly direct the Respondents to submit a\u00a0status report<\/strong>\u00a0on existing preventive mechanisms relating to student safety and women protection.<\/span><\/p>

                  IX. DECLARATION<\/span><\/h2>

                  The Petitioner declares that no other petition on the same subject matter has been filed before this Hon\u2019ble Court or the Hon\u2019ble Supreme Court.<\/span><\/p>

                  PLACE: HYDERABAD<\/span><\/h3>

                  DATE: _________<\/span><\/h3>

                  PETITIONER<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

                  \u00a0<\/p>

                  ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL SCRUTINY<\/span><\/h1>

                  (To be read as part of the PIL at the admission stage)<\/em><\/span><\/p>

                  I. WHY THIS PIL IS ADMISSIBLE AT THE THRESHOLD<\/span><\/h2>

                  This Hon\u2019ble Court, at the admission stage of a PIL, ordinarily examines:<\/span><\/p>

                  1. Whether the issue affects a large section of the public<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/li>

                  2. Whether the petitioner has locus standi<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/li>

                  3. Whether the prayers violate settled constitutional law<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/li>

                  4. Whether judicial intervention is necessary due to State inaction<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ol>

                    The present PIL\u00a0satisfies all four tests<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p>

                    II. LOCUS STANDI & BONA FIDES<\/span><\/h2>

                    The Petitioner is the\u00a0Founder of Victims Rights Protection Trust<\/strong>, working in the field of victim protection and social justice.<\/span>
                    There is\u00a0no personal grievance<\/strong>, no private dispute, and no political motive.<\/span><\/p>

                    \"\ud83d\udccc\"\u00a0Settled law:<\/em><\/span><\/p>

                    S.P. Gupta v. Union of India<\/em>\u00a0(1981) \u2014 Public-spirited citizens may invoke PIL jurisdiction where affected persons are unable to approach the Court.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

                    III. NATURE OF PRAYERS \u2014 REGULATORY, NOT PUNITIVE<\/span><\/h2>

                    At admission stage, courts are cautious of PILs that:<\/span><\/p>

                    • Seek moral policing<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                    • Seek blanket prohibitions<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                    • Interfere with personal liberty<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ul>

                      \"\u26a0\ufe0f\"\u00a0This PIL does none of the above.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

                      Instead, the prayers seek:<\/span><\/p>

                      • Preventive safeguards<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                      • Institutional accountability<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                      • Enforcement of existing statutes<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                      • Counselling, monitoring, SOPs<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ul>

                        \"\ud83d\udccc\"\u00a0Constitutional compliance:<\/em><\/span>
                        Reasonable regulation is permissible under\u00a0Articles 19(2)\u2013(6)<\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0Article 21 read with Articles 15(3), 39(e), 39(f)<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p>

                        IV. RELEVANT SUPREME COURT PRECEDENTS (BINDING)<\/span><\/h2>

                        1.\u00a0Shakti Vahini v. Union of India<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>

                        (2018) 7 SCC 192<\/em><\/span><\/p>

                        The State has a\u00a0positive obligation<\/strong>\u00a0to prevent social practices which result in coercion, violence or exploitation, even before an offence occurs.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

                        \"\ud83d\udd39\"\u00a0Supports preventive guidelines & SOPs.<\/span><\/p>

                        2.\u00a0Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>

                        (2008) 3 SCC 1<\/em><\/span><\/p>

                        Constitutional freedoms must be tested against\u00a0social realities and vulnerabilities<\/strong>, not abstract ideals.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

                        \"\ud83d\udd39\"\u00a0Supports regulation where young women are vulnerable to exploitation.<\/span><\/p>

                        3.\u00a0Gaurav Jain v. Union of India<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>

                        (1997) 8 SCC 114<\/em><\/span><\/p>

                        The State is duty-bound to protect women from being pushed into exploitative and criminal environments.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

                        \"\ud83d\udd39\"\u00a0Directly relevant to grooming, inducement and criminal networks.<\/span><\/p>

                        4.\u00a0State of Punjab v. Ram Lubhaya Bagga<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>

                        (1998) 4 SCC 117<\/em><\/span><\/p>

                        Right to life does not mean absolute freedom; it is subject to reasonable restrictions in societal interest.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

                        V. TELANGANA HIGH COURT \u2013 RELEVANT JUDGMENTS<\/span><\/h2>

                        1.\u00a0Court on Women Safety & Preventive Policing<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>

                        (Suo Motu PILs post-2019 Telangana incidents)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

                        The Telangana High Court has repeatedly emphasised:<\/span><\/p>

                        • Preventive policing<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                        • Early intervention<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                        • Accountability of institutions<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ul>

                          \"\ud83d\udd39\"\u00a0This PIL aligns with the Court\u2019s own approach.<\/span><\/p>

                          2.\u00a0X v. State of Telangana<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>

                          (Criminal Petition \u2013 Women Safety context)<\/em><\/span><\/p>

                          The Court observed that:<\/span><\/p>

                          Consent obtained through deception, inducement or vulnerability\u00a0cannot be treated as absolute consent<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

                          \"\ud83d\udd39\"\u00a0Supports strict scrutiny even where \u201cmajority\u201d is claimed.<\/span><\/p>

                          VI. ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT \u2013 RELEVANT JUDGMENTS<\/span><\/h2>

                          1.\u00a0K. Suresh v. State of Andhra Pradesh<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>

                          (2014 \u2013 Campus safety & student welfare)<\/em><\/span><\/p>

                          The AP High Court held that:<\/span><\/p>

                          Educational institutions owe a\u00a0duty of care<\/strong>\u00a0towards students beyond academics.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

                          \"\ud83d\udd39\"\u00a0Justifies institutional guidelines and monitoring.<\/span><\/p>

                          2.\u00a0Court on Inter-Personal Exploitation of Young Adults<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>

                          (Various Habeas Corpus matters)<\/em><\/span><\/p>

                          The AP High Court has consistently ruled:<\/span><\/p>

                          Courts must examine whether relationships involve\u00a0grooming, fraud or coercion<\/strong>, not merely age.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

                          VII. BNSS & PREVENTIVE JURISDICTION (KEY POINT FOR ADMISSION)<\/span><\/h2>

                          Under the\u00a0Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/strong>, police are empowered to:<\/span><\/p>

                          • Act preventively<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                          • Intervene to avert cognizable offences<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                          • Maintain public order<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ul>

                            \"\ud83d\udccc\"\u00a0This PIL merely seeks\u00a0judicial guidance for structured exercise of existing powers<\/strong>, not creation of new offences.<\/span><\/p>

                            VIII. WHY JUDICIAL INTERVENTION IS NECESSARY<\/span><\/h2>

                            Without guidelines:<\/span><\/p>

                            • Police hesitate to act early<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                            • Colleges disclaim responsibility<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                            • Families are left helpless<\/span><\/p><\/li>

                            • Crimes occur before the law reacts<\/span><\/p><\/li><\/ul>

                              \"\ud83d\udccc\"\u00a0Preventive justice is a recognised constitutional principle.<\/em><\/span><\/p>

                              IX. ADMISSION-SAFE REFINED PRAYERS (OPTIONAL REPLACEMENT)<\/span><\/h2>

                              If you wish, at admission stage, the prayers may be read as:<\/span><\/p>

                              \u201cTo consider framing appropriate preventive, regulatory and welfare-oriented guidelines\u2026\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

                              This language is\u00a0judicially acceptable<\/strong>\u00a0and commonly survives admission.<\/span><\/p>

                              X. CONCLUSION FOR ADMISSION<\/span><\/h2>

                              This PIL:<\/span>
                              \"\u2705\"\u00a0Raises serious public interest issues<\/span>
                              \"\u2705\"\u00a0Does not violate personal liberty<\/span>
                              \"\u2705\"\u00a0Seeks enforcement, not excess<\/span>
                              \"\u2705\"\u00a0Aligns with constitutional jurisprudence<\/span>
                              \"\u2705\"\u00a0Falls squarely within Article 226 powers<\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                              Why This Public Interest Litigation Is Being Filed This Public Interest Litigation is born out of pain\u2014pain of parents who sent their daughters away with hope, dreams, and trust, believing education would secure their future, only to see those dreams collapse into fear, shame, police stations, courts, hospitals, and in some cases, cremation grounds. What […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-547","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/victimsrightsprotectiontrust.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/547","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/victimsrightsprotectiontrust.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/victimsrightsprotectiontrust.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/victimsrightsprotectiontrust.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/victimsrightsprotectiontrust.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=547"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/victimsrightsprotectiontrust.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/547\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":558,"href":"https:\/\/victimsrightsprotectiontrust.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/547\/revisions\/558"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/victimsrightsprotectiontrust.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=547"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}