Telangana High Court
CRLP/15940/2026 of Buddeshwar Bolibanda Vs THE STATE OF TELANGANA on 29 September 2026
THE HIGH GOURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 15940 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. Buddeshwar Bolibanda, S/o. Kurmanna Bolibanda, Aged. 43 years, Occ.
[ 33031
IN THE HIGH GOURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 15940 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
1. Buddeshwar Bolibanda, S/o. Kurmanna Bolibanda, Aged. 43 years, Occ.
Business, Rl/o. Patherched, Narva Mandal, Narayanpet District.
2. Aaditya Bolibanda, S/o. Kurmanna Bolibanda, Aged. 40 years, Occ. Business, Fl/o. Patherched, Narva Mandal, Narayanpet District.
3. Shakunthatalamma Bolibanda, S/o. Kurmanna Bolibanda, Aged. 64 years, Occ. Housewife, Rl/o. Patherched, Narva lVlandal, Narayanpet District.
...Petitioners/Accused
AND
1. THE STATE OF TELANGANA, Through SHO Narva, Narayanpet Dist. Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.
2. Narayana Bolbanda, S/o. Baddappa, Aged. 57 years, Occ. Private employee, Rl/o. Patherched, Narva Mandal, Narayanpet District.
...Respondents/De-Facto Complainant
Petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the Proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 3 in connection with Crime No. 52 of 2026 of Narva PS, Narayanpet District dt. 1110412026, for the alleged offence U/Sec. 420, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC in the interest of Justice.
l.A. NO: 2OF 2026
Petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 3 in connection with Crime No. 52 of 2026 of Narva PS, Narayanpet District dt. 11.04.2026, for the alleged offence U/Sec. 420, 504, 506 rlw 34 of IPC including appearance and arrest of petitioners, pending disposal of the main criminal Petition, in the interest of Justice.
.,=nFi9r_!F!.8-=.rI,.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Karunakar Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioners and sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 .
The Court made the following: ORDER
TN THE HIGH COI]RT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE IIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.15940 of 2026
CNR.No.HBHC010668982026
Date:29 .09.2026
Between:
Buddeshwar Bolibanda 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 hled by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.52 of 2026 of Narva Police Station, Narayanpet District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 504 and 506 rlw 34 of the lndian Penal Code, 1860 (for short,'lPC').
2. Heard Mr.Karunakar Reddy, leamed counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.
3. \['ith their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission
4. Leamed counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed the alleged offence and have been falsely implicated in the present crime by making omnibus allegations. The allegations levelled in the complaint are purely civil in nature. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the ingredients of Sections 420,504 and 506 r/w 34 oI'the IPC are not attracted against the petitioners. He further submitted that respondent No.2 6ught to have approached the competent civil Court; on the other hand filed the present complaint by giving criminal colour. Hence, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioners is a clear abuse of the process of law 4.1. He further submits that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years and the Investigating Officer, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 35(l)) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short .BNSS,)
a and without following the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Biharr, 1S proceeding further in the matter and the same is contrary to law.
5. Per contra the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that there are specific allegations levelled in the complaint against the petitioners to attract the ingredients of Sections 420, 504 and 506 rlw 34 of the IPC. 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 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 it Arnesh Kumar (supra). However, the petitioners are avoiding receipt of notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and are not cooperating with the investigation. '1zo r+y 8 scc zz:
fEI
By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners will cooperate with the investigation, and submit their reply/explanation along with relevant documents. He fi-rrther submitted that the Investigating 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 ar.ailable on re:ord, it reveals that the offences levelled against petitioners are punishable with imprisonment ol less than seven years. Even according to the leamed 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 Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra)
8. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 12.10.2026 and the Investigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure contemplated under'Sestion 35(3) of the BNSS and follow the guidelines issued by the Apex Court jn Arnesh Kumar (supra). It is needless to mention that the petitioners are entitled to put forth their grievance, if any, upon receipt of notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, and produce all documents available with them before the Investigating Officer. The petitioners shall also cooperate with the investigation.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/. L. VIJAYA LAXMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Makthal.
2. The Station House Officer, Narva Police Station, Narayanpet District.
3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]
4. One CC to Sri Karunakar Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CD Copies GNK G To,
HIGH COURT DATED: 2910912026
ORDER
CRLP.No.15940 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION t'r- S"IAI{: o I ilii I ""1 [6 I \ \ b tP ,,L Ll -:'..