Rajat Gupta v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circu Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Cor- stay all further proceedings, including investigation, in FIR I,l 07.10.2023 on the file of Cyber Crime Police Station, Rachak: offences under Sections 406, 419 and 420 of the lndian Per 66-C and 66-D of the lnformation Technology Act, 2000, and c Respondent Police not to arrest the Petitioners/Accused in co crime. rstances stated in the t may be pleased to r 1036 of 2023 dated rda, registered for the rl Code and Sections rnsequently direct the rnection with the said This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Me r rorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri G.,l rnthosh pawan Babu, Advocate for the Petitioner and sri Jithender Rao veerama a, learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and ir ne appeared for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THB STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.4552 of 2026 Date: 30.03.2026 Between: Rajat Gupta . . Petitioner/Accused AND The State ofTelangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, At High Court for the State ofTelangana, Hyderabad-50O066. Through Station House Officer, Cyber Crime Poiice Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate and another. ... Respondents Order: This Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (for short 'the BNSS) by the petitioner/ accused seeking to quash the proceedings in F.I.R.No. 1O36 of 2023 of Cyber Crime Police Station, Rachakonda, registered for lhe offences punishable under Sections 406, 419 arld 42O of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short the IPCJ and Sections 66-C and 66-D of the Information Technologr Act, 2OOO-20O8 (for short ' the IT Act').

#2. With the consent of both the learned counsel, this matter is taken up for disposal at the admission stage. *^- \ 2

#3. Heard Mr. G. Santhosh Pawan Babu, learned : runsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learr :d Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No. 1-Stit

#4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submr t ed that the petitioner has not committed any offences and he ha ; been falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to t re allegations made in the complaint or hnal report, the ingr,r .ients of the offences under Sections 406, 419 and 42O of the IP(l and Sections 66-C and 66-D of the IT Act are not attracte I against the petitioner. The offences leveled against the ] rtitioner are punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. {owever, the Investigating Officer, without following the manda, r ry procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, the gu r elines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State ,r principles laid down by the Hon'lcle Apex Court in Md ' ",6"rt, Asfak Alam v. The State of Jharkhand & another (Crl.A.No. 2 l,O7 of 20231 dated 31.07.2O23, and also the circular issued by his Court in ROC.No. 1399 lSOl2023 dated 09.08.2023, is proce: ling with the investigation, which is contrary to law.

#5. Per contra, the learned Additional Publ.r Prosecutor submitted that there are specihc allegations levellr:r against the '(2014) 8 SCC 273 ,t 3 I I I I I i i l l petitioner that the petitioner is involved in cyber crimes and the investigation is under progress. At this juncture, whether the petitioner role is there or not, the same has to be revealed during the course of investigation. However, basing upon the written instructions dated 30.03.2026 furnished by Inspector of Police, CCPS, Malkajgiri, submitted that the petitioner approached the learned Trial Court and liled application for grant of anticipatory bail and the said application was dismissed on

31.07.2024. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings against him.

#6. The learned Additional Fublic Prosecutor further submitted that Investigating Oflicer is trying to serve the notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS to the accused, but the accused is not coming forward to the Police Station to receive the same. He further submitted that the Investigating Officer will follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supral and requested this Court to direct the petitioner to cooperate with the investigation.

#7. 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 I / l : 4 petitioner/ accused are punishable with imprisonmer I of less than seven years. Thus, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the petitioner/ accused is directed to apgrt ar before the Investigating Officer, on or before 1O.O4.2026, t nd on such appearance, the Investigating Officer is entitled t: issue notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C./Section 35(3) of BNSS .nd follow the guidelines issued by the Honble Apex Court in l.: nesh Kumar (supral. In view of the same, petitioner is entitled : submit his reply to the notice by raising all the pleas which a r : available to him and he is also entitled to submit the document; which are in his custody. The Investigating Offircer is furth,: directed to scrupulously follow the procedure contemplated r, rder Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines and principles ssued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra) anr Md. Asfak Alann (supra), and conclude the investigation.

#8. With the above directions, the Criminal Petiti: r is disposed closed Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand //TRUE COPY// SD/. vI. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASS STANT REGISTRAR G; SECTION OFFICER To, s 1 2 3 The V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Cum Excisr Court At L.B.Nagar, Rachakonda. The Station House Officer, Cyber Crime Police Station lachakonda District. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Te,l ngana at Hyderabad One CC to Sri G.Santhosh Pawan Babu, Advocate [OF'l C] 4 5 Two CD Copies r.- ElI I , HIGH COURT DATED: 3010312026 ORDER CRLP.No.4552 of 2O26 - -, lf: L-':',, ,.!( C), t2IPB * isp,a -z J] * DISPOSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION 2-E