Chowla Gopi Govardhan @ C Govedhan v. Diskict) - 509210

#1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its public prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. Through Station House Officer, Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate

#2. Sri Maskula Hari Prasad S/o Maskula Srinivas, Age. 25 years, Occ. Technician, R/o H.No. 13-1-157, Gana Boys Hostel, V.S.T Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Ranga Reddy District ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to Quash the crime No. 624 of 2026 of vanasthalipuram police Station, Malkajgiri Police Commissionerate against the Petitioners / Accused No. 1. NO:2 F Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the Respondent No 1 to issue notice to petitioner/ Accused No 1 under section 35 of BNSS in crime No. 624 of 2026 of Vanasthalipuram police Station, Malkajgiri Police Commissionerate. This Petition mming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri N. Srikanth Reddy represerting Sri V. Ram Mohan Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner, Sri Jithender Rao \teeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1. The Court made the following: ORDER :',{ IN THE HIGTI COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.5403 of 2026 Datez 10.04.2026 Between: Chowla Gopi Govardhan @ C Govedhan AND The State of Telangana, and another' Petitioner ...Respondents Order: This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.624 of 2026 of Vanasthalipuram Police station, Malkajgiri commissionerate, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as accused No.l, registered for the offences punishable under Sections t26(2I, 1i5(2) and 352 r/w section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha,2023 (for short tsNSJ'

#2. Heard Mr. N.Srikanth Reddy, iearned counsel, representing Mr. V.Ram Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Jithender Rao veeramalla, learned Additional Public prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.1. with their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. \: \ i. ..4.. ..2..

#3. Learned counser for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he was falsely implicatt:d in the present crime. Even according to the allegations made in the compraint, the ingredients of the offences under Sections t26(2],, 115(2) and 3s2 r/w section 3(s) of the BNS are not attracted against the petitioner. The petitioner was not present at the ali-eged scene of offence. However, respondent No.2 with an oblique motive implicated the petitioner as accused No.1 by making false allegations. The offences revelred against the petitioner are punishatrle with imprisonment of less than seven years. However, the Invr:stigating officer, without following the mandatory procedurr: prescribed under Section 3s(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik suraksha- sanhita, 2o2g (for short, .BNSSJ and the guidelines issued by the Apex court in Arnesh Kumar vs. state of Biharr, is proceeding with the investigation and the same is contrary to law. 4. Learned Additionar public prosecutor submitted that there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioner to attract the offences levelled against him and the Investigating officer wilt follow the due procedure as contemplated under section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Honble Apex court in Arnesh r{.umar (supral, however, the petitioner is not coming 1(20t4l8 scc 273 \'l ,7 ..1.. forward to receive the notice and requested'this Court to direct the petitioner to cooperate with the investigation' Learned counsel for the petitioner by way of reply submitted 5. that the petitioner will appear before the Investigating officer on or before 2L.O4.2O26. On such appearance, the petitioner may be permitted to submit his reply to the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS. 6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on reveals that the offences levelled against record, it petitioner/accused No.1 are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the Investigating officer will follow the due procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex court in Arnesh Kumar (supral.[n view of the same, petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating officer on or before 21.04.2026 and on such appearance, the Investigating officer is directed to scrupulously follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex court in Arnesh Kumar (supra) and conclude the investigation' It is needless to mention that the petitioner is entitled to submit his reply to the notice. -r€ ::4:: With the above directions, the Criminal Petition is disposed

#7. of. Misrcellaneous applications, pending if &fly, shall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY'/ P.C.SULEKHA DEVI ANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

#1. The Vll Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District.

#2. The Station House Officer, Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Mailkjgiri District 3. Two C(ls to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderaicad [OUT]

#4. One CC to SriV. Ram Mohan Reddy, Advocate IOPUC] 5. Two CD Copies VH/PSL d- HIGH COURT DATEDI fi10412026 ORDER CRLP.No.5403 of 2026 1 HES ).J 1 5 APR 202$ Z. * * DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION