Telangana High Court
CRLP/16390/2026 of Lalith Balhothra Vs The State of Telangana on 6 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 16390 OF 2026 Between Lalith Balhothra, S/o. Ramesh Balhothra, Aged about 45 Years, Occ. Business, R/o.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 16390 OF 2026
Between
Lalith Balhothra, S/o. Ramesh Balhothra, Aged about 45 Years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No. 3-5-380, Sirsilk Colony, Kagaznagar, K.B. Asifabad District.
... ...Petitioner/Sole Accused
AND
1. The State of Telangana, through S.H.O. Kagaznagar Town Police Station, K.B.Asifabad District, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.
2. Raavi Murali Krishna, S/o Ram l\rlohan Rao, Aged about 49 Years, Occ:
Business, R/o. H. No.3-3-161/A, Guntur Colony, Sirsilk Colony, Kagaznagar, K.B.
Asifabad District.
...RespondentsiComplainant
Petrtion under Section 528 of BNSS praying that rn the circumstances stated in the Ailemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to the crime in F.l.R.No. 318 of 2026 On the file of the Kagaznagar Town Police Station for the offence UlSec. 126(2),292 BNS to quash the same.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2026
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the lt/lemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the Hrgh Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in F.l.R.No. 318 of 2026 On the file of the Kagazoagar Town Police Station for the offence UlSec. 126(2),292 BNS, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the IVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Rurlresh Deshpande, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutc,r on behalf of the Respondent No.'1 .
The Court made the following: ORDER
a--r
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HT'DERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIV AS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.16390 of 2026
CNR.No. H8HC010688612026
Dzte:06.10.2026
Between:
Lalith Balhothra
...Petitioner
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 Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.3 18 of 2026 of Kagaznagar-Town Police Station, Kumrambheem Asifabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2) and 292 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short'BNS').
2. Heard Mr.Rudresh Deshpande, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.
3. With their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed the alleged offence and has been falsely imp[cated in the present crime by making omnibus allogations. Even according to the aliegations 1eve1l:d in the complaint, the lngredients of Sections 126(2) and 292 ol the BNS arc not attracted against the petitioner. He further subrnitted that thr: petitioner did not cause any public nuisance against respondent No.2. Hence, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner is a clear abuse of the process of law.
4.1. He furlhel submits that the offences levelled against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years and the Investigating Ofhcer, without follc,wing the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 35(.3) of the Blraratiya Nagarlk Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (fot shorl 'BNSS') and w thout following the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Srrpreme Couft in Arnesh Kumur Vs. State of ,Biharl , is proceeding further in the matter and the same is contrary to law. '(u or+) s sr;c zi:
5. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that there are specific allegations levelled in the complaint against the petitioner to attract the ingredients of Sections 126(2) and292 of the BNS. Whether the allegations levelled in the complaint are true or not the same has to be revealed during the course of investigation especially the investigation is under progress. The petitioner is not entitled to seek quashment of the proceedings against him at this stage. However, since the offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years,, the Investigating Officer intends to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Amesh Kumar (supra). However, the petitioner is avoiding receipt of notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and is not cooperating with the investigation.
6. By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner will cooperate with the investigation, and submit his reply/explanation along with relevant documents. He furlher submitted that the Investigating Officer may be directed to fo1low I thr: due procedure as contemplated under the provisicns of the B},ISS
1. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parlies and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the offences levelled against petrtioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Even ac:ording to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the In'restigating Officer will follow the procedure contemplrated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and also the guidelines fornrulated by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra).
8. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and cilcumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to appear before the lnvestigating Ofhcer on or before 17.10.20t16 and the In rzestigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and llollow the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). It is needless to mention that the petitioner is entitled to put forth his grievance, if any, upon receipt ofnotice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, and produce a1l documents available with him before the *ru-- To,
Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall aiso cooperate with the lnvestlSatlon
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/-C. DEEPIKA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
1. Station House Officer Kagaznagar Town Poljce Station, Kumrambheem Asifabad Drstrict.
2. One CC to SRl. RUDRESH DESHPANDE Advocate [OPUC]
3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad IOUT]
4. Two CD Copies BA/GNK FT
HIGH COURT DATED: 0611012026 v J iA/ *.:-E-:-: .'j a,', (- Or \o { '.:- 15 0c12ut o ,.:( J * t'i
ORDER
CRLP.No.16390 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION f Lof€S --.-.--- \s\\o\)c 0-'p-