Telangana High Court
CRLP/16376/2026 of Mohd. Azharullah Kazi Vs 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: 't6376 0F 2026 Between: AND It/ohd. Azharullah Kazi, S/o Anwarullah Kazi, aged 32 years, Occupation.
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: 't6376 0F 2026
Between:
AND
It/ohd. Azharullah Kazi, S/o Anwarullah Kazi, aged 32 years, Occupation. Self employed, R/o. H No.3-5-107l.1 NarayanguOa fvOeiaU'aO
.. Petitioner/Acc used
state of relangana, Rep.by the public prosecutor, High court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad.
The station House officer, Madhapur porice station Kavuri Hirs-Guttara Begumpet Madhapur, Telangana _ 500 033
... R es p o n d en ts/C o m p la ina nts
K. Tanishq, S/o. K. Srinivas, .aged 21 years Occupation. Not known, R/o. H.
No.97lA, MLA Colony Hyderabad.
...Respondent No.3/Defacto Complainant
Petition under Section 52g of BNSS praying that rn the circumstances stated in the lVlemorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, rhe High court may be preased to call for the records rerating to FrR vide cr. No.7942026 on the fire of r!4adhapur P S, cyberabad District, dated 26-05-2026 registered for the offences under Sec.
126(2), 118(1), 3s1(2), 3i2 rtw 3(5) of BNS and quash the same against the Petitioner herein, in the interest of justice.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2026
Petrtron under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated rn the l\/emorandum of Grounds of Crrminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including personal appearance of the Petitioner herein in F lR vide Cr. No.79412026 on the file of IVadhapur P S., Cyberabad District, dated 26-05-2026 registered for the offences under Sec 126\2), 118(1),351(2),352
r/w 3(5) of BNS - pendrng disposal of the Quash Petition.
This Petition coming on for hearing upon perusing the l\,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petrtron and upon hearing the arguments of Ms. Kalpana Ekbote, Senior Counsel representing lt/s. Ayesha Naik, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla. Additional Public Proser;utor on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT TIYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.16376 of 2026
CNR.No. HBHC010685382026
Date:06.10.2026
Between:
Mohd. AzharullahKazi
.Petitioners
AND
The State ofTelangana and two others
...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 bv the petitioners/accused seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.794 of 2026 of Madhapur Police Station, Cyberabad, for the offences punishable under Sections ),26(2),118(1), 351(2) and 352 rlw 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, .BNS')
2. Heard Ms.Kalpana Ekbote, learned Senior Counsel representing Ms.Ayesha Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent Nos.1 and 2'
With their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage ol admission.
4. 'fhe leamed couusel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not comrnitted the alleged offence and has been falsell, implicated in the present crime' Even according to the allegalions levelled in the complaint, the ingredients of Sections 126(2),118(1),351(2) and 352 read with Section 3(5) ofthe BNS are not attracted against the petitioner' He furlher submitted that the alleged incident took place on 18 05 2026' whereas respondent No.3 lodged the present complaint only on 26.05.2026. afier a delay of more than eight days' and no reason has been assigned for the said delay Hence, the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner is a clear abuse of the proccss of 1au'.
5. Per contrct. thc leamed Additional Public Prosecutor subnritted that specific allegations have been leveiled against the a petitioner in the complaint and the said allegations, prima facie, disclose the commission of cognizable offences. Whether the allegations levelled in the complaint are true or not has to be revealed during the course of investigation, particularly when the investigation is still in progress. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashing 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 Ofhcer has already served notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS upon the petitioner on 08.06.2026. The petitioner is entitled to put forth his grievance, ifany, before the Investigating Officer and is entitled to submit the documents, if any, in his possession. The petitioner, without submitting the same, has approached this Court and filed the present Criminal Petition.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not received any notice under Section 35(3) ofthe Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNSS') from the Ifrr..estigating Officer. \
I 7 . Having considered the rival submissions made b1, the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the offences levelled againsl the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the lnvestigating Officer had already issued notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to the petitioner on 08.06.2026, which was disputed by the leamed counsel for the petitioner.
8. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circurnstances of the case and the submissions made by the respective parties, the Investigating Officer is directed to serve notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to the petitioner, if not already served and follow the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex Court tn Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihart, and the petitioner is entitled to put forth his grievance by raising all the pleas u'hich are available to him and he is also entitled to submit the documents, if any, which are in his custody, to the '(:o t -+ ) t scc :-:
Investigating Officer and the petitioner shall cooperate with the lnvestlgatlon.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed SD/- B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
1. The ll Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-X Additional Judicial First Class I\Iagistrate Rangareddy District at Kukatpally Cyberabad.
2. The Station House Officer, [t/adhapur Police Station Cyberabad.
3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]
4. One CC to IVls Ayesha Naik, Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CD Copies A/GNK To, W, G
HIGH COURT DATED: 0611012026
ORDER
CRLP.No.16376 of 2026 16 r,ci2025 i -.r- HE :114 pfj c tl f a '. -. '.,'. '^'),iL '' {=,."'' DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION 0,,1 \q \t \r1,