THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P. Nos.11464 and 11468 of 2025

COMMON ORDER

Since, the issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for official respondent Nos.1 to 3, in both the writ petitions, and with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, these writ petitions are taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

3. Having regard to the nature of lis involved in the Writ Petitions and the manner of disposal, this Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondent No.4, who is one and the same in both the Writ Petitions, is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petitions.

4. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioners, in brief, is that despite the petitioners submitting reply, dt.08.04.2025, in response to the notice issued under Section 35(3) of BNSS in connection with Cr.No.5/2025, dt.07.01.2025, the respondents-authorities are summoning the petitioners to the police station thereby causing harassment, which action of the respondents it is contended as highly illegal, arbitrary, apart from violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

5. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for official respondents submits that based on the complaint made by the 4^th respondent herein, the authorities have registered a case vide Cr.No.5/20-25, dt.07.01.2025, against one K.Ramulu, A.Ramesh & others under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 316(5) of BNS and are investigating into the aforesaid crime.

6. Learned Government Pleader further submits that in the course of investigation into the aforesaid crime registered, the respondents-authorities have issued notices under Section 35(3) of BNSS calling upon the petitioners to submit the information as desired, for the purpose of ascertaining their involvement in the commission of the aforesaid crime.

7. Learned Government Pleader further submits that as the petitioners, on being served with notices under Section 35(3) of BNSS, have submitted their explanation on 08.04.2025, the authorities would consider the aforesaid explanations, and if complicity of the petitioners in commission of the aforesaid offence is found, the authorities will take further action to add/array the petitioners as accused by following the procedure prescribed under BNSS and also by obtaining necessary orders from the Court.

8. Learned Government Pleader further submits that since, the respondents-authorities have issued notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS, the petitioners anticipating that they may be arrayed as accused in the aforesaid crime, have filed the present Writ Petition to prevent the respondents-authorities from taking further action or conducting investigation into the aforesaid crime registered.

9. I have taken note of the respective submissions made.

10. Admittedly, based on the complaint made by one B.Naresh Babu, a case vide Cr.No.5/2025 has been registered against one K.Ramulu and A.Ramesh & Others, relating to fraudulent payment of wages to outsourcing employees working in the limits of Nagarkurnool Municipality.

11. Though the petitioners claim of they not being involved in the commission of the aforesaid crime and are no way connected, the complicity of the petitioners in the aforesaid crime can only be ascertained when the respondents-authorities conduct investigation into the aforesaid crime registered, for which the respondents- authorities have issued notices to the petitioners herein under Section 35(3) of BNSS, to which the petitioners claim to have submitted their explanation on 08.04.2025.

12. Since, the petitioners have submitted explanation to notice issued to them, this Court is of the view that respondents-authorities are to be directed to conduct investigation in to the case registered vide Cr.No.5/2025 and take further action, including adding/arra