High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent No. 4 AND 5 in threatening to arrest the petitioners without following the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3)of BNSS(Previously Section 41-A Cr.P.C) and also the guidelines formulated by the Honourable Apex court in Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar reported in 2014 B SCC 273 in connection with F.l'R No. 29 of 2025, dt. 14.02.2025 of P.S Huzurnagar, Suryapet District is nothing but depriving the personal liberties of the petitioners illegal null and void and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of lndia Consequently direct the Respondents to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3)of BNSS(Previously Section 41-A Cr.P.C) and also the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex court in Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar reported in 2014 B SCC 273 in connection with F.l.R No. 29 of 2025, dl. 14.02.2025 of P.S Huzurnagar, Suryapet District as against the petitioners lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cburt may be pleased to direct the Respondents to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3)of BNSS(Previously Section 41-A Cr.P.C) and also the guidelines formulated by the Hon'blee Apex court in Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar reported in 2014I SCC 273 in connection with F.l.R No. 29 of 2025, dt. 14.02.2025 of P.S Huzurnagar, Suryapet District as against the petitioners, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. MULLANGI RAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: SRI G. ANTKETH REDDY AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent NO.6: -- The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR Writ Petition No.5113 of 2025 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri G.Aniketh Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admlssion stage.

2. Having regard to the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition at the admission stage and the nature of /5 involved, this Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondent No.6/de facto complainant is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.

3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that though the respondents- authorities on the basis of the complaint made by the 6th respondent herein have registered a case, vide Crime No.29 of 2025 d1.L4.02.2025, , claiming that the petitioners in drunken state having obstructed the 6h respondent from discharging his official duties, the respondents- authorities are threatening to arrest the petitioners without following the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of BNSS, which action of the respondents-authorities it is contended is highly illegal, arbitrary and I I l 2 contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v/s. State of Bihar 1.

4. Per contra, learned Assistant Government pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5 submits that on the aforesaid complaint made by the 6h respondent herein, the authorities have registered a case vide, Crime No.29 of 2025 and issued a notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS to the petitioners herein; and that the authorities would take further action of investigating into the aforesaid crime registered in accordance with law. 5 I have taken note of the respective contentions urged.

6. Having regard to the submissions made as above, since the respondents-a uthorities on registering the aforesaid crinte against the petitioners herein, having issued notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS, this Court is of the view that while the petitioners are to be directed to comply with the notice issued under Section 35(3) of BNSS, the respondents- authorities are to be directed to investigate and take further action in the aforesaid complaint strictly in accordance with law. 7 Subject to above direction, the Writ petition is disposed of. No order as to co:;ts '1zor+1s scc zt: I I i B. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall 3 stand closed. SD/-P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA EPUTY REGTSTRAR //TRUE COPY// SEcrtott oFFIcER To, Hyderabad

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department' Secretariat Buildings, Saifaba d, 2. The Superintendent of Police' Suryapet District' At Suryapet' 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police' Kodad' At kodad' Suryapet District. 4. The Circle lnspector of Police' Huzurnagar' At Huzurnagar' Suryapet District

5.TheStationHouseOfficer'HuzumagarPoliceStationAtHuzurnagar, SuryaPet District'

6. One CC to SRI' IvIULLANGI RAMI REDDY Advocate IOPUCI 7. Two CCsto GP FORHOME'High Courtforthe StateofTelangana [OUT] 8. Two QD CoPies KKS LS r HIGH COURT DATED:1910312025 ORDER WP.No.S113 of 2025 H1 s; 14 r€ 16 APf, zIE z I i PAT C * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ./1 4.,< 82/x t I I