High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 08 TEL CK 5795

Singamsetty Durga Rao & Ors. vs The State Of Telangana & Anr.

Telangana High Court · Decided on 7 August 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
J. Sreenivas Rao, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No. 12831 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 658 words

This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioners, seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.88 of 2026 of Edulla Bayyaram Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, registered for the offences punishable under Section 85 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘the BNS’) and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2.

Heard Mr.C.H.Jayakrishna, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.1.

3.

With the consent of both the learned counsel, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in the present case by respondent No.2, as petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are the parents and petitioner Nos.3 and 4 are the sister and brother-in-law of accused No.1, by making omnibus allegations. Though the petitioners never harassed respondent No.2 for additional dowry, at no point of time did respondent No.2 live along with the petitioners. Hence, the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners is a clear abuse of the process of law.

4.1.

He further submitted that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. However, the Investigating Officer, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C./Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar1, is proceeding with the investigation and the same is contrary to law.

5.

Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that specific allegations have been levelled against the petitioners in the complaint regarding the harassment caused by the petitioners, including the demand for additional dowry. He further submitted that whether the allegations levelled in the complaint are true or not can be revealed during the course of investigation, especially since the Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of LWs.1 to 6 and the investigation is under progress. At this stage, the petitioners are not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings. However, the offences levelled against the petitioners arise out of matrimonial disputes. He further submitted that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment for less than seven years. When the Investigating Officer was trying to serve notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS on the petitioners, the petitioners avoided receiving the notice and have not been cooperating with the investigation from the date of registration of the crime, i.e., 11.05.2026. Hence, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief, much less the relief sought in the present criminal petition.

6.

By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation.

7.

Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years arising out of the matrimonial disputes. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the Investigating Officer intends to follow the procedure prescribed under the provisions of Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra).

8.

In view of the same, the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 5 are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 19.08.2026, and on such appearance, the Investigating Officer is directed to issue notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS and follow the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar supra. It is needless to mention that the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 5 are entitled to put forth their grievance upon receipt of the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and are also entitled to submit the documents, if any, which are in their possession.

9.

With the above directions, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

Footnotes

  1. 1.(2014) 8 SCC 273