CRLP/15919/2026 of Vendi Sriram Vs The State of Telagana on 29 September 2026

ORDER

This Criminal Petition has been hled under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (for short 'the BNSSJ by the pr:titioners / accused Nos.l to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in (lrime No.640 of 2026 of AJ Mills Cokrnry Police Station, Warangal District, registered for the offence punishable underr Section .l 18(a) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (fc'r short 'the BNS).

2. Heard Mr. M. Ajay Kumar, learned counseL for the petitioners, and Mr. V. Jithender Rao, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, apperrrrng for respondent No.1. With their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed the alleged offence and have been falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to the allegations levelled in the complaint, the ingredients of the offence punishable under section 318(4) read with 3(5) of the BNS are not attracted against the petitioners. The allegations 1evelled in the complaint are purely civil in nature in respect of monetary transaction. Respondent No.2 ought to have approached a competent civil Court, on the other hand, lodged the present compiaint by giving it a criminal colour. He further submits that at the instance of respondent No.2, when the police officials interfered in respect of monetary disputes, the petitioners have approached this Court and frled W.P.No.18640 of 2026, questioning the action of the ofhcial respondent Nos.1 to 5 from interfering with the civil disputes at the instance of the unofficial respondent Nos.6 to 12. In the said W.P., respondent No.2 herein was also made as party- respondent No.6. This Court granted interim direction directing respondent No.5 not to harass the petitioners by calling to the police station by giving threatening ca11s without having any valid reason 4 . He further submits that thereafter, the petitioners again approached this Cburt and filed another W.P.No.3O628 of 2026, questioning the aclion of ofhcial respondents therein especially E EE-IEIE7 J respondent Nos.3 to S-police in calling the petitioners to police station by giving threatening calis without having any valid reasons, which is contrary to the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.18640 of 2026. When the said writ petition is came up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent No. L to 5, basing on the written instructions received from the concerned officer, submitted that three crimes were registered against the petitioners by respondent Nos.3 to 5 poiice station. Taking into consideration the above said submission, this CotLrt directed the respondent-police to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and to strictly fo11ow the guidelines laid down by the Hon"ble Apex Court in Arnesh Runtar Vs, State of Biharl. This Court further held that if the provisions of Section mentioned in the FIR are altered, as a consequence, Section 35(3) of the BNSS is not applicable, the respondent police are at the liberty to take further action in acc,rrdance with law. In spite of the atrove said order, the Investigating Ofhcer, without following the mandatory procedure as contemplated under 1aw and principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumdr (supra), is proceeding further in the matter and the same is contrary to 1aw. 1(2014) 8 scc 273

5. Per contro, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there are specific allegations leveiled in the complaint against the petrtioners that the petitioners, with a dishonest intention, collected huge amount from respondent No.2. The allegations leveled in the complaint attract the ingredients of the above said offences. However, pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.3062B ol 2026, when the Investigating Officer is trying to fo11ow the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of Section 35(3) of the BNSS, the petitioners are evading the receipt of notice and not cooperating with' the investigation. Hence, the petitioners are not entitled to seek any relief.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners by way of reply submitted that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation.

7. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioners frled W.P.No.3O628 of 2026, questioning the action of the ofhcial respondents in calling the petitioners to police station and interfering with the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and respondent No.2. This Court, on 76.09.2026, while disposing of the said writ petition, directed the police-respo"g":_t" to issue notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to the petitioners and to follow the guidelines of Arnesh !EE-GIE7

Kutnar (supra). The specific case of the learned counsel for the petrtioners is that the offences 1evel1ed against the petitioners are punishable u'ith imprisonment less than seven years. In spite of the specihc direction issued by this Court, the Investigating Ofhcer haci not served the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS. Whereas, the specific case of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor is that, when the Investigating Ofhcer is tr5,-ing to serve the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, the petitioners are evading the receipt of notice and not cooperating with the investigation.

8. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the respective parties, tl.e petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 13.1O.2026 and on such appearance, the Investigating Officer is directed to fo1low the pror:edure contemplated under the provisions of the BNSS, and also the guidelines formulated by the Hon'b1e Apex Court in Antesh Kurnar (supra) ard the petitioners shal1 cooperate with the investigation. 11. is needless to mention that the petitioners are entitled to submrt reply to the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS by raising all the pleas which are available to them and they

To, is also entitled to submit the documents, if any, which are in their custody, to the Investigating Ofhcer.

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 I Addl. Judicial Maglstrate of First Class, Warangal

2. The Station House officer, AJ Mills colony Police Station, warangal District

3. Two ccs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High court for the state of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

4. One CC to SRI AJAY KUMAR MADISETIY Advocate IOPUC]

5. Two CD CoPies TPK/GNK \qr

HIGH COURT DATED: 2910912026

ORDER

e 9F s-{' \\ 7\ .$' CRLP.No.15919 of 2026 ou a +o S\ !( &crH + CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF c.nkft &" s .., ,