Smt Devaragattu Vasantha & Anr. vs State Of Telangana & Anr.

This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.239 of 2026 of Nizambad IV Town Police Station, Nizamabad District, for the offences punishable under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNS') and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short 'DP Act').

Heard Mr.K.Ravi Mahender, learned counsel for the petitioners 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 petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed the alleged offences and have been falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to the allegations levelled in the complaint, the ingredients of Section 85 of the BNS and Section 4 of the DP Act are not attracted against the petitioners. He further submitted that the son of the petitioners and the daughter of respondent No.2 have already filed a petition seeking dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Respondent No.2 filed the present complaint by making omnibus allegations, implicating the petitioners as accused Nos.2 and 3 only on the ground that they are the parents of accused No.1, while suppressing several material facts, though the petitioners have already paid the entire amount that was settled between the parties at the instance of the elders on 28.07.2026. Hence, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners would amount to a clear abuse of the process of law.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor basing upon the written instructions furnished by the Investigating Officer dated 19.08.2026 submits that the Investigating Officer had already served notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 on 18.08.2026 and the Investigating Officer will 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).

Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that there are matrimonial disputes between accused No.1 and daughter of respondent No.2 and 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 18.08.2026.

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners disputed the contention of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the petitioners had already received notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS.

Taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the respective parties, the Investigating Officer is directed to serve notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to the petitioners, if not already served and directed to follow the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the BNSS and the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). It is needless to mention that the petitioners are entitled to put forth their grievance 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 and the petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation.

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