High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 ot the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the qature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of fhe Respondent No.5 in non-following the provisions of criminal procedure code sec. 41(a) or sec. 35(3) of B,N.s.s. Act and trying to arrest the Petitioner without following Hon'ble Apex court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. state of Bihar in crime No.90 of 2025 on the file of the Gandhi Nagar Police Station for the offence U/Sec.420, 406, 380, 451 ,457,456,441 ,378 of lPC, during the pendency of orders of this Hon'ble High court by colluding with the Respondent No.6,7 is ilregal and arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 1s,21 of constitution of lndia and also violative of natural justice and consequenUy direct 'l the Responclent No 5 for not to interfere into the peaceful life of t'le Petitioner and not to interfere intt rrivil disputes between the Petitioner and resprndent No.6 and 7 and consequent y lirect the respondent No.5 to follow the provisions of criminal procedure c;ode (cr P C.) 1973 or Section 35(3) of B.N.S.S and not to arrest the Petitioner, by follcu,ing the directions of the Hon'ble Apex court rn Arnesh Kumar vs. state of Bihar in crime No.90 of 2025 on the file of the Gan Jhi Nagar Police Station for the off€,rce U/Sec.420, 406, 380, 451 ' 457 ' 456 441 l'78 of IPC lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition unrlerr section 151 CPC praying that in the circumr;tances stated in the affidavit filed irr support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondent Ncr.5 to follow the provisions of Criminal Procedur: Code (Cr'P C.) 1973 o!' Section 35(:)) of B N S.S and not to arrest the Petitioner by following the directions ol the l-lon'ble Apex cou( in Arnesh Kumar Vs State cf Bthar in crime No.g0 of 2025 oi the file of the Gandhi Nlagar Police Statror for the offence U/Sec.420, 406, 380, 451 , 457, 456,441, 378 of IPC Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAPOLU EHASKAR Counsel for the Fespondent Nos.1 TO 5: SR! R.LAXMIKANTH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 & 7: -- The Court made the following: ORDER I 1 F I t: I, I i * I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENTVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.l5l23 of 2o25 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: "For the reasons statcd in the accompanying aflldavit, the petitioner herein prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in Lhe nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of thc Rcspondent No. 5 in non- following the provisions of criminal proccdure code Sec. 41(a) or Sec. 35(3) oi B.N.S.S. Act arrd trying to arrest the Petitioner without following Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar in Crime No.9O of 2025 on the hle o[ the Gandhi Nagar Police Station for the offence U/Sec.42O, 406, 380, 451, 457, 456, 447, 378 of IPC, during the pendency of orders of this Honble High Court by colluding with the Respondcnt No.6,7 is i-llegal and arbitrar_w and violativc of Artrclcs 14, 15. 2 I of Constitution o[ India ar-rd also violatrve oI naturer.l j u stice and consequently direct the Respondent No.5 for not to interfere lnto the peaceful life of the Petitioner and not to interfere into civil disputes between the Petitioner and respondent No.6 and 7 emd consequently direct the respondent No.5 to follow tl.re provisions of Criminal ,l973 or Sectron 35(3) of B.N.S.S Procedure Codc (Cr.P.C.) and not to arrest the Petitioner, by following thc directions of the Honble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar in Crime No.9O ol 2O25 on the file of the Gandhi Nagzrr Pohcc Station for the offence lJlSec.42O,406, 380, 451, 457, 456, 441, 378 ot tPC and pass such other order \ \ 1 ) 1 1 or orde r,i as this Honble Court may decm fit and pro:t r in Iee circr rnstances of the case."

2. Heard Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petiti,)ner arrd Srt R.Laxmikanth Iteddy, Ierar-ncd Lssistant Go'"'err-'rme 1t Pleader for Home Department, appei-ring for respondent I'los.1 to 5.

3. \ rith the consent ol the learned counsel for the partie s. tt.r r,r'rit petition IS disposed of at the .;tage of admission 4 . Durirr 3 the course of hearir, g, le arned coun se i for the petitioner su:bmitted that basing on the complainr. lociged bv the r*;ltondent No.7, Crime No.90 of 20l5 \\ras registered 1r',' the Station House Officer. Gar-rihi Nagar Police Star.i rn for the offences under Sectior-rs .12)O ,+06, 380, .+51 , .+.i7 , 456, 447 and 378 of the lndian Penal Code. 1860, on lr).O4.2025. He further submitred rh.1t all the offcnces le,,r: Ied against the petitioner are punishaltle rvith an irnprison ment of less than seven 1, cars e nd the responclenr a.uthorities ',vithout follor,,,ing the pr tceclure conternplarecl under Section 4l-A of the (triminal Procedur,: Oode, I973 (Cr.P.C)/Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), and the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Biharr are trying to arrest the petitioner and the same is contrary to larv.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home Department has not disputed about the registration of Crime No.9O of 2025 by the concerned police and has also not disputed that the offences levelled against the petrtroner are punishable with an imprisonment of less than seven years

6. ln the light of the aforesaid submissions, notice to respondent Nos.6 and 7 is dispensed rvith

7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, rvithout 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 20.O5 .2025. On such appearance of the petitioner, the Investigation Officer is directed to scrupulously follow the procedure contemplated under Section 4I-A of ' (2014) 8 SCC 273 ) l I I Cr.P.O/Sr:r:, ior-r 35(3) of BNSS and the guiclelines LSsued by the r\pex Cr,urt in Arnesh Kumar (supra). B. lt is tnade clear that the petitioner shall ( ooperate ,"r,ith the Irvestigation Olficer for the investigar.ior.r and mal<e hcrstll available to the Investigatror: Office:. as and u'her. inlorrnatio r ,'doc uments as sought by him to conclude: the inve s tiga tr o r . rrquired and pror.rc e 9 If t 13 petitioner fails to coope r.i1te w,tth thc Investigalit I Ofticer for investigation, thc Inve:;tigatior_r Ofllccr is at libertl' to take action against her in ar:cordance u,ith lau. 10 With tre above direction, the u,rit petition is c isposed TLLere shirll be no order as to costs. It4isce llz n cous applications pending. r I errrr . s l_rall stand closed. SD/- P. PADMANABHA REDDY DEPU TY BEGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// Hyderirbao. :j'z te of Telangana. SECTION OFFICER 1 . The Pr rncipa )ecretary. Home Department. secretarat Buil Ji rq Secretariat. I " 2 The Drrector C;r.neral of po'iice, Telanoana. Hvderabad. 3 The Commissrcner of Police, Hyderab"ad poli6e Comrnissionerate, 4 Hyderabad. The Assistant c ommissioner of police, Hyderabad police con.missionerate, Hyderabad. The Station lkrtrse Offrcer, Gandhi Nagar police Station Hyde rabad police Comm iss ion(:r a le. at Hvderabad. One C() ro S I RAPOL'U BHASKAR. Advocate IOPUCI Two CCs to (iP FOR HOME, High Court for the'State of Telan3ana, at Hyderabad. ()UTl Two CD Copres t I To J 6 7 B I)SK, SS r .-t_r_!& F l r ':t:'atx*r&r ,r.i -' - ., 'r,, .1 r F i F ! t: I r . i l l ' HIGH COUR'T DATED:1 410,512025 VACATION COURT ORDER WP.No.1512:3 ot 2025 t/- - .-/ .t ...'r : , _: -) h\$ \ $r .,| : .7 'L=.:t' '.1 iiri ',tl , .ti / DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT CIf,STS \