CRIME No. 52 of 2025 · Telangana High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
GroundsofCriminalPetiti-onanduponhearingtheargumentsofSriSANJEEV REDDYGILLELA,AdvocateforthePetitionerandthePublicProsecutor(TG)on behalf of the Respondent No' 1 and None appeared for the Respondent No 2' The Court made the following: ORDER / Cri Order f'hLe Hon 'ble Sft Iusti e al Petition No .3146ot2025 .Sree vas Rao Ths ( ,rirninal petition is fijed by the peutioner /accused, seeking mri:rpatory bail under Section 4g2. c:1. ))harattya Nagarik .,iurai:sha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), in connt:ction wrth Crime No 5')_ of 2025 on rhe file of Station Ilouse Officer, CCC N'as Pur. Mancherial Districq Rarnagundam Commissi, tn(.rilte, registered for the offence prurish, lble under Secdons l.ti-t t l. BNSS. 2 Hear:l Atr. Sanjeev Reddy Gillela, learned cou.r;el for rhe pefiuoner (:rcr.sed) and Mr. Syed yasar Marno.r,, learned Addittonal prrirlic prosecutor appearing for respondenr No.1/Stare
During rr-(. course of hearing, it is brought ro tlle nouce of rhis Cou.:r rhrr- the offence leveled against thc pe.rd<,ner is punisirable vrrrL z.rr irnprisonment of less than severr ye, tfs ,
In view of the same, without going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner to appear before the investigation officer on or before 18'03'2025' On such appe r nce of the petitionet, the investigation officer is directed to scrupulously follow the procedure contemplated under Secdot 41'-A of the Criminal Procedure Code' 1973 (Cr.P.C.)/Section 35(3) of BNS and the guideLines issued by the Apex Cowt in Arnesh Kumar Vs' State of Biha/'
It is made clear that the pedrioner/accused shall cooPerate with the investigation officer for the investigation andmakehimselfavailabletohrmaSandwhenrequiredand also provide the information/documents as sought by him to conclude the inves tlgafl on.
If the petitioner/accused fails to cooPerate with the investigation officer for investigation, the investigation officer is at liberty to take action against him in accordance with law' 1(2014) 8 scc 273 \ \ 3 7 Sublc<:r ro the above direcdons, the Criminal I, disposecl of No costs e[hon is As u L se<1,rei, miscellaneous petitions, pendirg il. an1,, stand closed. //TRUEcoPYtt t'o', 1-1.^ lj::ffi I I i !+rr*;,t,,;[liiilt,r*f*t]irrir,*fi **:i*fiHii::il""", S M/gh i1iljj /t.I t HIGH COUFIT DATED: 11ttl3tZO2S I rrI s'I,q ,.\. ORDER CRLP.No.31416 ot 2025 o o ) t ?a ur 716 j I. ,i, .l -at. " . r.r;!) DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION L
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.