Telangana High Court
CRLP/14411/2026 of Seema Panwar Vs The State of Telangana on 28 September 2026
Between: AND Seema Panwar, Wo Raj Singh Panwar Aged about 49 years Occ Housewife R/oHNo '14-9-408 lo 41012 Chuddi Bazar Begum Bazar Nampally Hyderabad ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.2 The state of Telangana, Rep by Public Prosecutor High court for the state of Telangana At Hyderabad P Ravinder Reddy,
Between:
AND
Seema Panwar, Wo Raj Singh Panwar Aged about 49 years Occ Housewife R/oHNo '14-9-408 lo 41012 Chuddi Bazar Begum Bazar Nampally Hyderabad
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.2
The state of Telangana, Rep by Public Prosecutor High court for the state of Telangana At Hyderabad P Ravinder Reddy, S/olate Buchi Reddy Aged about 60 years Occ Sub lnspector of Police R/oMaddur Village shabad Mandal Ranga Reddy District IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEI\iIBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 14411 OF 2026
...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS
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 all further proceedings rn FlR.No 731 of 2026 of Police station Mailardevpally in respect of the petitioner/accused No2 in the interest of Justice'
t.A . NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the lr/lemorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in lnvestigation rncluding the arrest of the petitioner/accused iilo.2 in FiR.No. 731 of 2026 of Police Station Mailardevpally pending disposal of criminal petition in the interest of Justtce'
This Petition Coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of crimrnal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri GARLAPATI
JITHENDER REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao veeramalla, the Addl. Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared on behalf of the ResPondent No 2.
The Court made the following: ORDER
-!!Gr!rF!!!
r!!;t7
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAI)
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NoJ44ll of 2026
CNR No.HBHC0106036 72026
D*e28.09.2026
Between:
Seema Panwar
..Petitioner
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 under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (for short 'the BNSS') by the petitioner/accused No.2 seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.731 of 2026 of Mailarderpally Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 110 and 318 (4) riw. 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023 (for short 'the BNS').
2. Heard Mr.G.Jithender Reddy, leamed counsel for the petitioner and leamed Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent Nos. I and 2.
- )
3. With their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
4. Leamed counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the present crime solely based on the confession statement given by accused No'l, who is none other than her son. The confession statement given by the co-accused is not permissible under law, especially when there is no conspiracy between the petitioner and..accused No 1, and the ingredients of the offences under Sections 1 10 and 3 1 8(4) read with 3(5) of the BNS are not attracted. He further submits that the offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years' However, the Investigating Officer, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short'BNSS') and the guidelines issued by the Apex Cotrt it Arnesh Kumar Vs- State of Bihart , is proceeding with the investigation and the same is contrary to law. He further submits that the Investigating Officer had already served notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS upon accused No.l on 03.08.2026. When accused No'l failed to comply with the conditions enumerated in the said notice, he '1zot+1 s scc 273
rl*-t!-z was arrested after obtaining the necessary permission liom the learned Magistrate and was remanded to judicial custody on 05.08.2026. Subsequently, he was enlarged on bail.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that there are specific allegations levelled in the complaint, and the said allegations attract the ingredients of the offences under Sections 1 10 and 31 8(4) read with 3(5) of the BNS. The investigation is in progress. At this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings. However, the offences atleged against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. The lnvestigating Offrcer had already served notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS upon accused No.1 on
03. (18.2026. The Investigating Officer will follow the very same procedure in respect of the petitioner. However, the petitioner is not cooperating with the investigation.
6. By way of reply, leamed counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will cooperate with the Investigating Officer. '7 . Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that, even according to the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the leamed Public Prosecutor, the Investigating Officer had served notice under Section 35(3) ofthe BNSS upon accused No.1 on 03.08.2026. and J
:- the lnvestigating Officer intends to follow the very same procedure in respect of the petitioner/accused No.2.
8. Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions made by the respective parties, the petitioner/accused No.2 is directed to appear before the lnvestigating Officer on or before 09.10.2026, and on such appearance, the lnvestigating Officer is directed to issue notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS and follow the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). It is needless to mention that the petitioner/accused No.2 is entitled to put forth her grievance upon receipt of the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and is also entitled to submit the documents, if any, which are in her possession.
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 Xll Addl. Judicial lvlagistrate of First Class, Rangareddy District at Ra;end ranagar.
2. The Station House Officer, Police Station Mailardevpally, Hyderabad Comm issionerate.
3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 4 One CC to SRl. GARLAPATI JITHENDER REDDY Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CD Copies To, TPK/GNK
HIGH COURT DATED: 2810912026
ORDER
GRLP.No.14411 of 2026 )() \\t , rnr ltt ST,qT I .\ + :- . CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF (.,'