##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5771 of 2026

Date: 17.04.2026 Between:

Bandari Madhavi ...Petitioner/Accused No.8

AND

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad and another.

...Respondents

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.8 seeking to quash the proceedings in F.I.R.No.46 of 2026 of Easgon Police Station, Kumrambheem Asifabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 82(1) read with 49 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023

(for short ‘the BNS’).

2. Heard Mr. B.Venkat, learned counsel representing Mr. Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Jithender Rao

##PAGE2##

::2::

Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for

respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offences and she has been falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the ingredients of the offences under Sections 82(1) read with 49 of the BNS are not attracted against the petitioner. There is no conspiracy between petitioner and other accused; hence, the offence under Section 49 of the BNS is also not made out. In respect of the offence under Section 82(1) of the BNS, the entire allegations are leveled against accused No.1 only. He further submits that the offences leveled against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. The Investigating Officer, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) and without following the guidelines formulated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar, 1(2014) 8 SCC 273, is proceeding further in

the matter and the same is contrary to law.

##PAGE3##

::3::

4. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the Investigating Officer will follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and also the guidelines formulated

by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra)

5. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the only allegation levelled against the petitioner is that she is the second wife of accused No.1, having married him during the subsistence of his marriage with the de facto complainant. The record discloses that the offences levelled against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. The Investigating Officer ought to have followed the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, as well as the guidelines formulated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar

(supra).

6. In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to cooperate with the Investigating Officer and the Investigating Officer is entitled to strictly follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, as well as the guidelines formulated by the Hon’ble Apex

##PAGE4##

::4::

Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). It is made clear that the petitioner is entitled to submit reply/explanation along with the documents, which

are available with her, to the Investigating Officer.

7. Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.]

___________________

J.SREENIVAS RAO, J

Date: 17.04.2026

Note:

Issue CC in three days

b/o. mnv

##PAGE5##

::5::

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5771 of 2026

Date: 17.04.2026

mnv

Click Here to Read the rest of this document