AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.4 seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No. 160 of 2026 of Chaderghat Police Station, Hyderabad registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(4) and 318(2) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'BNS').
Heard Mr.Mohammed Imran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithendar Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.
With the consent of both the learned counsel, 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 offence and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that there are no allegations, much less any specific allegations, against the petitioner that he, with a dishonest intention, induced respondent No.2 and misappropriated the money belonging to respondent No.2. He further submits that the offences under Sections 316(4) and 318(2) r/w 3(5) of the BNS cannot go together, in view of the principle laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. & Ors vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr1 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 Bihar2, is proceeding further in the matter and the same is contrary to law.
Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner, being an Executive Sales Agent of Sri Lakshmi Distributors, failed to remit the amount and misappropriated the amounts belonging to respondent No.2 and Sri Vishnu Enterprises. The petitioner along with the other accused, allegedly misappropriated a huge amount of more than Rs.44,67,506/-. The investigation is still in progress and, at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings. Basing on the instructions of the Investigating Officer, who is present before this Court, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the Investigating Officer has already served a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to accused No.1 on 10.05.2026 and accused No.6 on 15.05.2026. He further submits that the Investigating Officer will follow the same procedure in respect of the petitioner herein.
By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation.
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 prosecution, the Investigating Officer had already issued notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to accused No.1 on 10.05.2026 and accused No.6 on 15.05.2026.
In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 05.09.2026 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.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.