Telangana High Court
CRLP/16256/2026 of Kalakuntla Krishnaiah, Vs The State of Telangana on 5 October 2026
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIGE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No | 16256 0F 2026 [ 3303 I Occ. Majid Between: 1. Kalakuntla Krishnaiah, S/o. Kalakuntla Bikshapathy, Age. 47 years,
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIGE J SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No| 16256 0F 2026
[ 3303 I
Occ.
Majid
Between:
1. Kalakuntla Krishnaiah, S/o. Kalakuntla Bikshapathy, Age. 47 years, Agriculture, R/o. H. No. 5-38t612, Borragudem, Wargal Mandal, V.T.C'
Palle, Majidpalle Post, Waragal Medak District, T.G. - 502 334.
2. Kalakuntla Elander, Sio. Kalakuntla Krishnaiah, Age. 25 years, Occ- Student, Rl/o.H.No.5-3B1612,Borragudem,WargalMandal,V.T.C.MajidPalle,Majidpalle Post, Waragal Medak District, T.G. - 502 334.
3. Ranjith Reddy Atla, S/o. Ramesh Reddy, Age. 45 years, Occ Agriculture, Rl/o'
Veluru village, Waragal Post. Medak District T.G.
..Petitioner/Accused Nos. 1 to 3
AND
1. The state of Telangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High court of Telangana, Hyderabad
2. Kumar Goud Poodari, S/o Malla Goud, Occ' Business, Fl/o. H No l-127, Near Nacharam village, Waragal Mandal Siddipet District T.G. Ph. No. 9704344388
Present addreis. Plot No.1-38, Damdamoodi Enclave, Post Basheerbad, Jeedimetla Medchal-Malkajgiri District.
...Respondents/De-facto Compl ai nant
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 quash the F.l.R. No. 53/2026, dt. 19.09.2026 on the file of the P S Begumpet' Siddipet District'
T.G. against the Petitionersi Accused No '1 to 3'
l.A. NO: 2OF 2O26
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 a further proceedings against the Petitioners/ Accused Nos. 1 to 3 pursuant to F.l.R. No.
5312026, dt. 19.09.2026 on the fite of the p.s. Begumpet, siddipet District, T.G pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri shaik Karimulla, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional pubtic 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
AT H}'DERABAD
THE HONOIJ'RABLE SRI JUSTTCE J.SR.EENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.16256 of 2026
CNR.No. HBHC0r0685922026
Date: 05.10.2026
Between
Kalakuntla Krishnaiah and two others
...Petitioners
AND
The State ofTelangana 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 bv the petitioners/accused Nos.l to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.53 of 2026 of Begumpet Police Station, Siddipet, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 324(2), 126(2),352 and 351(2) ofthe Bharaitya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. Heard Mr.Shaik Karimulla, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Iearned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.l.
3. With their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed the alleged offence and have been falsell, irnplicated in the present crime by making onrnibus allegations. He further submitted that the allegations levelled in the complaint are purely civil in nature in respect of agricultural 1and. in particular, petitioner No.1 purchasecl the subject property from the original owner under a registered sale deed dated 10.09.2026,by paying valuable sale consideration, and is a bona fide purchaser. Hence, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners would amount to a clear abuse of the process of la'"v. 4.1 . He futher submits that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years ancl the Investigating Officer, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the Bharatrya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ,BNSS,) and rvithout lbllowing the guidelines formulated by the Hon,ble o Supreme Court tn Arnesh Kumar proceeding further in the matter and th Vs. State of Biharl, is e same is contrary to law.
5. Per contra, the learned Additional public prosecutor submitted that there are specific allegations in the complaint that the petitioners, without having any manner of nght over the property, trespassed into the property of respondent No.2 and damaged the crop. 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 petitioners are not entitled to seek quashment of the proceedings against them at this stage. However, since the offences alleged against the petitioners are punishabre with rmpnsonment 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 (supra). However, the petitioners are avoiding receipt ofnotice under Section 35(3) ofthe BNSS and are not cooperating with the investigation. '1zot+1 a scc ztt leamed counsel for the petltloners
6. BY waY of rePlY' submitted that petitioners will cooperate with the investigation' and submit their replyrexplanation along with relevant documents' He fufiner submitted that the Investigating Offrcer may be ditected to follorv the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of thE BNSS. 't . Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it teveals that the offences levelled against petitioners are punishable with impnsonment of less than seven years' Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor' the lnvestigating Officer will follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and also the guidelines formulated by the Apex Courl in Arnesh Kumar (supra)'
3. Taking lnto consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case' the petitioners are directed to aPPear before the Investigating Officer on or before 15 '10 2026 and the Investigating Olficer rs directed to follow the procedure contemplaled under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and follow the guidelines issuedby'the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). It is needless to mention tlat the petitioners are entitled to put forlh their grievance, if any, upon receipt of notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, and produce all documents available with thern before the Investigating Officer. The petitioners shall also cooperate with the investigation. g. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,
5. Two CD Copies DLIGNK ii[:3j[:#illjiffd"'l,E*:;#i:;';1j#fi nJ'"'#s;\3'3r''i';'"n"""'
- B'"'"%'8',i S?usil'i* x"i"rr'' Advocate toPUcl HIGH COURT DATED: 0511012026 '\ \\e STATE n ( Ii 0I 00I2028 t\ .:- -
ORDER
CRLP.No.16256 ol2O26 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION & ,{ \ rt dw ,\\\ a