The court ruled it improper to quash one case when a counter-case exists, emphasizing the necessity of procedure compliance during investigations.

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short ‘ BNS S ’) by the petitioner/accused No.1 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in Crime No.124 of 2025 on the file of Narayanpet Rural Police Station, Narayanpet District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 118 (1), 115 (2), 352 and 351 (2) r/w. 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short ‘ BNS ’).

2. Heard Mr.R.Chandrashekar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a pending dispute between the petitioner and the de facto complainant. Earlier, the petitioner lodged a complaint vide FIR No.123 of 2025 on 28.08.2025 at 7:45 a.m., during which he sustained a head injury and was hospitalized. The present FIR, vide FIR No.124/2025, was lodged by the de facto complainant on the same day, i.e., 28.08.2025 at 9:00 a.m., which is entirely false. He further submitted that since the petitioner went to the hospital for treatment of his head injury, he could not have been present at the scene of the alleged offence, and the allegations levelled by the de facto complainant are baseless. He further submitted that the petitioner filed W.P.No.16814 of 2025, wherein the High Court granted status quo in his favour on 13.08.2025, arising out of the same dispute. He, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there is a case and a counter-case between both parties. In such circumstances, one case cannot be quashed while the other is kept pending.

5. Perused the record.

6. Admittedly, there are case and counter case between the parties. Hence, applying the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Puneet Beriwala v. State of NCT of Delhi , [2025 (SC) 504], it is not proper to quash one case while the other case is pending. Hence, it is not a fit a case to quash the proceedings. However, the offences are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 17.10.2025 between 11:00 a.m. and 05:00 p.m. and in turn, the Investigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure laid down under Section 3 5 (3) of the BNSS (previously section 41-A of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973) and also the guidelines formulated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar , [(2014) 8 SCC 273] scrupulously. However, the petitioner shall submit his defense and co-operate with the Investigating Officer as and when required by furnishing information and produce all relevant documents/material required for the purpose of the investigation and the Investigating Officer shall consider the same and shall complete the investigation strictly in accordance with law.

7. With the above said observations, this Criminal Petition is disposed of.

8. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.