The court underscored the importance of procedural safeguards in anticipatory bail requests to prevent arbitrary action against accused parties.

Order

:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2, seeking anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNS S ), in connection with Crime No.141 of 2025 on the file of the Station House Officer, Chengomul Police Station, Vikarabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Section s 118 (1), 329(3), 324(4), 352, 351(2), 189(2), 191(2) r/w 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ) and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SCs/STs (POA) Amendment Act, 2015 (for short ‘the SCs/STs (POA) Act’).

2. Heard Mr.Munuga Sateesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Shaik Hussain, learned counsel, representing Mr.Mohammad Adnan, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1/State.

3. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the Investigation Officer without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under the provisions of Section 41-A of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.)/Section 35(3) of BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar , [1(2014) 8 SCC 273] proceeding with the matter.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 submitted that submitted that there is a serious threat in the hands of the petitioners and the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with an imprisonment of LIFE as per Section 45 of IPC, especially relying upon the provisions of Section 3(2)(va) of the SCs/STs (POA) Act.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor by way of reply submitted that the other offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. Hence the ingredients of Section 45 of IPC are not applicable. He fairly submitted that the Investigation Officer will follow the due procedure prescribed under Section 41-A of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.)/Section 35(3) of BNSS .

6. Taking into consideration the above said facts and circumstances, without going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioners to appear before the investigation officer on or before 17.07.2025. On such appearance of the petitioners, the investigation officer is directed to scrupulously follow the procedure contemplated under Section 41-A of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.)/Section 35(3) of BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra)

7. It is made clear that the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 shall cooperate with the investigation officer for the investigation and make themselves available to him as and when required and also provide the information/documents as sought by him to conclude the investigation.

8. If the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 fail to cooperate with the investigation officer for investigation, the investigation officer is at liberty to take action against them in accordance with law.

9. Subject to the above directions, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. No costs.