T V Ramana Murthy vs The State Of Telangana & Anr.

This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.278 of 2026 of Malakpet Police Station, Hyderabad, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as accused, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 299, 196(1), and 302 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS').

Heard Mr. G.V.Subrahmanyam, learned counsel representing Mr. M.Giri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1. With their consent, this 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 crime. The petitioner has neither made any allegations nor intended to hurt or wound the religious sentiments of any person, as alleged in the complaint. However respondent No.2 lodged the present complaint by making omnibus allegations. Even according to the allegations levelled in the complaint, the ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 299, 196(1), and 302 of the BNS are not attracted against the petitioner. Hence, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner is a clear abuse of the process of law. He further submitted that the offences alleged against the petitioner 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 ‘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 against the petitioner and the said allegations prima facie attract the ingredients of the above said offences. Whether the allegations made against the petitioner are true or not, the same has to be revealed during the course of investigation, especially the investigation is under progress. Since the offences levelled against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years, when the Investigating Officer is trying to follow the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of Section 35(3) of the BNSS, the petitioner is evading the receipt of notice and not cooperating with the investigation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner by way of reply submitted that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation.

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 wants to follow the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of Section 35(3) of the BNSS.

In view of the same, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 31.08.2026 and on such appearance, the Investigating Officer is 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) and the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation. It is needless to mention that the petitioner is entitled to submit reply to the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS 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.