M. Umesh vs The State Of Telangana & Anr.

This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused seeking to quash the proceedings in F.I.R.No.118 of 2026 of Itikyal (M) Police Station, Jogulamba Gadwal District registered for the offence under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS').

Heard Smt. Annapurna Sreeram, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Respondent No.2 herself left the matrimonial home of the petitioner and filed the present complaint by making omnibus allegations. The petitioner never harassed respondent No.2 either physically or mentally and never demanded any additional dowry. Hence the ingredients for the offence under Section 85 of the BNS are not attracted against the petitioner and is 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 submits that there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioner about the harassment made by him. Whether the petitioner has committed the offence or not will 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, the petitioner is avoiding to receive the notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS and not cooperating with the Investigating from the date of registration of the crime.

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 learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the Investigating Officer intends 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 15.08.2026 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.