CRLP/16148/2026 of ABUBAKER BIN SALAM Vs The State of Telangana on 6 October 2026

ORDER

This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.255 of 2026 of Adilabad-ll Town Police Station, Adilabad District, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as accused No.2 for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(2),340,296(b) and 351(2) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'BNS').

2. Heard Mr.s.Chandrashekhar, leamed for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1

3. With the consent of both the learned counsel. the criminal petrtion 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 faisely implicated in the present crime by making omnibus ailegations. He further submitted that the petitioner was adopted by the parents of respondent No.2 as their adopted son and property disputes are pending between them. In order to resolve the said disputes, respondent No.2 hled the present complaint by giving a criminal colour. He further submitted that the petitioner had not obtained the family member certihcate by producing any fake or forged documents, as alleged in the complaint. In particular, the family certificate was issued on the basis of the adoption of the pelitioner by the father of respondent No.2 on 13. 1 1 .2009, whereas the father of respondent No.2 died on ll.O7 .2025. Hence, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner would amount to a clear abuse of the process of law 4.1. He fur1her submits that the offences levelled against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years and the Investigating Ofhcer, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') and without following the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court rn Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihart, is proceeding further in the matter and the same is contrary to law.

5. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there are specific allegations in the complaint that the petitioner obtained a family member certificate by producing forged and fabricated documents, despite the petitioner not being a family member. 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 Arnesh Kumar '1zo ta1 s scc zz:

(supra). However, the petitioner is avoiding receipt of notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and is not cooperating with the rnvestlgatlon.

6. By wav of reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner will cooperate with the investigation, and submithis reply/explanation along with relevant documents. He further sultmitted that the lnvestigating Officer may be directed to follow the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of the BNSS.

7. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the offences levelled against petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Even according 10 the leamed Additional Public Prosecutor, the Investigating Officer will follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and also the guidelines formulated by the Apex Coutlt in Arnesh Kumar (supra).

8. In view of the above, the lnvestigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the

To, BNSS and follow the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). It is needless to mention that the petitioner is entitled to put forth his grievance 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 Officer.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed SD/- K. BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECT OFFICER

1. The Station House officer, Adilabad-ll Town Police station, Adilabad District.

2. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana' at Hyderabad [OUTI

3. One CC to S Chandrashekhar, Advocate [OPUC]

4. Two CD Copies GNK i

HIGH COURT DATED: 0611012026

ORDER

CRLP.No.16148 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION ( 1 'r'rE S i'4 ra e oo I ir 00r 2026 a -t ah \t 10 _ ",', /' ':, ..1i.