Telangana High Court
CRLP/16966/2026 of Srinivas Reddy Gillela Vs The State of Telangana on 14 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: '16966 OF 2026 Between: Srinivas Reddy Gillela, S/o. late Gopal Reddy, Age 62 years, Occ.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: '16966 OF 2026
Between:
Srinivas Reddy Gillela, S/o. late Gopal Reddy, Age 62 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Yedula village, Gopalpet Mandal Wanaparthy District, State of Telangana.
... Petitioner/Accused
AND
1. The State of Telangana, Rep, by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad.
... RespondenUCompla inant
2. Sri. D. Subramanyam, Revenue Divisional Officer, Wanaparthy, Wanaparthy District, State of Telangana.
...RespondenUDefacto Complainant
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the [\/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in FIR No 13712026 Gopalpet Police Station, Wanaparthy District registered Under Sections 324(3) BNS, 3(1) PDPPA on behalf of the Accused for the following among other grounds.
l.A. NO:2OF 2026
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay all further proceedings in FIR No. 13712026 Gopalpet Police Station, Wanaparthy District registered Under Sections 324(3) BNS, 3(1) PDPPA, including the appearance of the Petitioner/ Accused .
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri R Sridhar, Advocate for the Petitioner and the I\/r. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of None appeared for the Respondent No. 2.
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITIoN No.16966 of 2o26
CNR. No. HBH CO lO7 07 322026
Date:.14.10.2026
Between:
Srinivas Reddy Gillela
...Petitioner/accused
AND
The State of Telangana and another
..Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This Crimina-1 Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.137 of 2026 of Gopalpet Police Station, Wanaparthy District, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as accused, registered for the offences punishabie under Sections 324(3) ot tJle Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short tsNS) and Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (for short'the PDPPAJ.
2. Heard Mr. R. Sridhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, and learned Additional Pubiic Prosecutor for re spondent No.1. With their consent, this criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admrssron
3. Learned counsel lor the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed the alleged offences and has been AT HYDERABAD
falsely implicated in the present crime. The allegations levelled in the complaint are purely civil in nature. Respondent No.2 lodged the present complaint only at the instance of one J. Papireddl' as there are civil disputes pending between the petitioner anci J.Papireddy. The petitioner has not encroached into the portion of the land covered by Sy.Nos.304, 306, 3O7, 370 and 37 1 nor caused obstruction to the path way. Solely basing on the report submitted by the Tahsildar, Yedula Mandal, respondent No.2 lodged the present complaint. He further submitted that the petitioner dug the road only for the purpose of laying water pipe line to his agricultural iand and subsequently he restored the road. Hence, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner is a ciear abuse of the process of laiv. He further submitted that the offences alleged tharr seven years. The Investigating Officer, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'the BNSS') and without foilowing the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar ys, State of Blhafl, is proceeding further in the matter and the same is contrary to 1ar.t . '1zo t+.r s scc :r_r
4. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there are specific allegations leveiied in the complaint that the petitioner encroached the Government land and obstmcted the path way. By virtue of the said action, severe obstruction was caused to the movement of irrigation officiais, departmental vehicles and local farmers for agricultural purposes. Whether the allegations made against the petitioner are true or not, the same has to be revealed during the course of investigation, especially the investigation is under progress. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashment of the proceedings against him at threshold. Since the offences levelled than seven years, the Investigating Officer will follow the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of Section 35(3) of the BNSS, and the petitioner sha11 cooperate with the investigation.
5. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of tl.e material available on record, it reveals that the allegations the offences 1evel1ed against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner had restored the road to the original position and according to the learned Additional Pubiic Prosecutor, the Investigating Offrcer wants to fo1low, the due I
To, 5 Tlirro CD CoPies DL/ABK
procedure as contemplated under the provisions of Section 35(3) of the BNSS'
6. In view of the same, the petilioner is directed to appear before the Investigating C)fficer on or before 27.10.2026 and on such appearance, the Investigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the BNSS, and also the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra) and the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation. It is needless to mention that the petitioner is endtled to submit repiy to the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS by raising all the pleas which are available to him and he is also entitled to submit the documents, if any, which are in his custody, to the Investigating Ofhcer' T. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- B. PRIYADARSHINI JAISWAL ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY' SECTI FICER
1. The 1 Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Wanaparthy. 2 The Station House Officer, Gopalpet Police Station, Wanaparthy District.
3. Two ccs to the Public prosecutor, High court for the state of rerangana, at Hyderabad (OUT1
4. One CC to Sri R Sridhar, Advocate tOpUCl r.F
HIGH COURT DATED: 1411012026
ORDER
CRLP.No.16966 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION 1 7 ocT 2026 *
* oES.,flC a' co ( T S A e 6'
c \ G) Htol't(!