Pingili Pradeep Reddy vs The State Of Telangana & Anr.

This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.424 of 2026 of Subedari Police Station, Warangal District, for the offences punishable under Section 308(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNS').

Heard Mr.G.Veera Babu, 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 submitted that the petitioner has not committed the alleged offences and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the alleged offence took place on 23.06.2025, whereas respondent No.2 filed the present complaint on 24.07.2026, after a lapse of more than one year, at the instance of the owner of the vehicle, without assigning any reasons for the long delay. Hence, the ingredients of Section 308(2) of the BNS are not attracted against the petitioner. He further submitted that the offences levelled against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years and 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 Apex 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, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings merely on the ground of delay in filing the complaint, especially when there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioner to attract the ingredients of Section 308(2) of the BNS. He further submitted that the petitioner forcibly took the vehicle from the hands of respondent No.2. Whether the allegations levelled in the complaint are true or not the same has to be revealed during the course of investigation especially the investigation is under progress. He further submitted that the petitioner involved in similar offences. However, since the offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years, the Investigating Officer intends to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra).

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 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 Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra).

In view of the above, the Investigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and follow the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). It is needless to mention that the petitioner is entitled to put forth his grievance by raising all the pleas which are available to him and he is also entitled to submit the documents, if any, which are in his custody, to the Investigating Officer.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.