Bandela Nikhil vs The State Of Telangana & Anr.

This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.446 of 2026 of Ameenpur, Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offences under Sections 329(4), 118(1) and 324(4) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNS').

Heard Mr.G.Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.

With their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed the alleged offences and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner neither trespassed into the house of respondent No.2 nor damaged any household articles, as alleged in the complaint. Respondent No.2 implicated the petitioner as an accused by making omnibus allegations. He further submits that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused only on the ground that he was present along with the other accused at the scene of the offence. He further submits that the petitioner had entered into an Agreement of Sale with one Nagaraju Thota on 08.04.2026 for purchasing the residential house bearing No.4-31 (G+2), admeasuring 232.22 square yards, situated at Patelguda Village, Sangareddy District. The vendor of the petitioner had purchased the said property from the wife of respondent No.2. When the petitioner visited the schedule property along with his vendor, at the instance of his wife, respondent No.2 lodged the present complaint.

He further submits that the ingredients for the offence under Sections 329(4), 118(1) and 324(4) r/w 3(5) of the BNS are not attracted against the petitioner and are punishable with imprisonment of less than 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^{11.(2014) 8 SCC 273}, is proceeding further in the matter and the same is contrary to law.

Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioner that the petitioner, along with the other accused, trespassed into the property of respondent No.2 and damaged the household articles. Whether the petitioner has committed the offence or not has to be revealed during the course of investigation and the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings at this stage. He further submitted that the Investigating Officer wants to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and also the guidelines formulated by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra) on the ground that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment less than years. However, when the Investigating Officer is trying to serve notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, the petitioner is avoiding to receive the notice and not cooperation with the investigation from the date of registration of the crime.

By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will appear before the Investigating Officer to receive notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS and will submit reply to the said notice.

Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the offences levelled against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the Investigating Officer wants to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and also the guidelines formulated by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra).

In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 08.08.2026 and submit reply/explanation along with the documents, which are available with him, to the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer is entitled to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and follow the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra).

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.