Mazar Mohiyoddin and Mohammad Sameer vs The State of Telangana and Md. Kaleemoddin

This Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (for short ‘the BNSS’) by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.205 of 2026 of Veenavanka Police Station, Karimnagar District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(4), 340(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘the BNS’).

Heard Ms.K.Annapurna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, through video conference and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.1.

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

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in the present crime. The allegations made in the complaint are purely civil in nature, arising out of the Agreement of Sale dated 15.11.2024. Respondent No.2 ought to have approached the competent Civil Court; on the other hand, filed the present complaint by giving a criminal colour. She further submitted that the petitioners have neither forged nor fabricated any documents, as alleged in the complaint. Hence, the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners would amount to a clear abuse of the process of law.

She further submitted that the offences levelled against the petitioners under Sections 318(4), 336(4), 340(2) and 351(3) of the BNS are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. The Investigating Officer, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the 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 in the complaint regarding the forging of documents. Whether the allegations levelled in the complaint are true or not has to be revealed during the course of investigation, especially as the investigation is under progress. The Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of LWs.1 to 4. The petitioners are not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings at this stage. However, since the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years, the Investigating Officer has already served notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS upon the petitioners on 12.08.2026, and the petitioners are entitled to put forth their grievance pursuant to the said notice. On the other hand, the petitioners have approached this Court and filed the present criminal petition, and the same is not maintainable in law.

By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, as on date, the petitioners have not received notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS.

During the course of the hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor placed on record a copy of the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS issued to the petitioners, by duly serving the same upon Ms.Sharmeen Fatima, learned counsel, who appeared physically before this Court on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioners.

Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the Investigating Officer had already issued notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to the petitioners on 12.08.2026, which was disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. However, during the course of the hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor furnished a xerox copy of the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS issued to the petitioners to Ms.Sharmeen Fatima, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioners.

In view of the same, the petitioners are entitled to submit reply to the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS dated 12-08.2026, by raising all the pleas which are available to them, and they are also entitled to submit the documents, if any, which are in their custody, to the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer is further directed to follow the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the BNSS, and also the guidelines formulated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra).

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.