SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 30075

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
Chunchu Suryanarayana – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLP 11164/2025



THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.11164 of 2025

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/accused

Nos.1 to 3 under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.314 of 2025 on the file of S.H.O., LMD Colony Police Station, Karimnagar District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’), 2023 and Section 175(3) of

BNSS.

2. Heard Mr. V. Ravi Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the offences alleged against the petitioners, except 316(5) of BNS, are punishable with imprisonment with less than seven (07) years. He further submitted that the ingredients of Section 316(5) do not get attracted in this case as the petitioners are not public servants and therefore, prayed this Court to issue directions to

the Police to follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35 (3)

of BNSS.

4. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that initially, a final report was filed and in pursuance to the Protest Petition filed by the de facto complainant and the orders of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Karimnagar, the present case has been registered under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 351(2) read with Section

3(5) of BNS and Section 175(3) of BNSS.

5. Perused the record. It reveals that the petitioners are not public servants and hence, the ingredients under Section 316(5) do not get attracted in this case. Since the punishment prescribed in all the other offences is less than seven (07) years, without going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 10.09.2025 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 35 (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 petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 shall submit their defense and co-operate with the Investigating Officer as and when required by furnishing information and producing all relevant documents/material required for the purpose of investigation and the Investigating Officer shall consider the same and complete the investigation, strictly, in accordance with law.

6. Accordingly the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

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

___________________________

JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA Dt.01.09.2025 Pvt

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top