Thakur Karan Singh & Anr. v. The State of Telangana
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 29 May 2026
- Bench
- VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingl)', the Criminal Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. In that vieu of the matter, u'ithout going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioners / accused Nos,l and 4 to appear belore the Investigating Officer on or before 03.O8.2026 between 10:00 a.m and 01'00 p.m.…
Judgment
The State of Telangana, Rep, by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under section 482 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused Nos. 1 and 4 hereln on Anticipatory Bail in the event of their arrest in crime. No. 77 of 2026 On the file of P.S. Kagaznagar, Kumrambheem Asifabad District, offences registered U/Sec. 420, 406, r/w 34 IPC and pass such other order or orders. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Ms. vEROSE SANJANA , Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the sole Respondent' The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF'TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO AB]I4IIYA_L_ ]ETITI AIY No.8O39 of2O26 Date 29.05.2026 Between: Thakur Karan Singh and another AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad Petitioners Re sponden t ORDER 1. This Criminal petitton is filed under Sectton 4g2 of Bharativa Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ,BNSS,) seeking the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners / accused Nos. 1 and 4in Crime No.77 of 2026, on t|,e flle of Kagaznagar-To* n porice statron, Kumrambheem Asifabad, registerecl for the of'ft:nccs punishabrc under Sections 420. 406 r/w 34 ol Indian Penzri Code.
Heard Srr Verose Raghunath, learned Senior Counsel appearing on beharr o[ Ms. verose Sanjana, learned counsel for the petitioners/ accuSed \os. 1 and 4 as well as Sri Jitender Rao 2 SCR, J Crlp 6019 2026 Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.
Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has restricted the relief sought in the instant petition stating that a direction be issued to the Police to follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35 (3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short'BNSS').
On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would contend that several cases are registered against the petitioners. However, the said offences are not related to the offences alleged in the present case.
Considering the submissions of both the learned counsel and the material available on record, it is seen that the allegations alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 42O,406 rlw 34 of Indiar Penal Code and the punishment prescribed for the offences alleged against the petitioners is less than seven (07) years. 3 SC R. J Crlp 803t) 2026
Operative part
In that vieu of the matter, u'ithout going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioners / accused Nos,l and 4 to appear belore the Investigating Officer on or before 03.O8.2026 between 10:00 a.m and 01'00 p.m. and in turn. the Investigating Officer is directed to follos, the procedurc laid down under Section35 (3) of the BNSS (prevroush Section 4l A of Crrminal Procedure Code, 1973)' and also the guidelines formulated by the Hon'b1e Supreme Court of lndra in Arnesh Kumar v, State of Bihart scrupulousll'. Hou'ever, the petitioners/ accused Nos.1 and 4 sha, ll submit their defense and co-operate with the Investigating Officer as and u,her, required bv furnishing information and producing all re levant documents/ materiai required for the purpose of investtgatron and the Investigating Officer shal1 consider the same and complete the investigation strictly 1n accordance u'ith lau 7 . Accordingl)', the Criminal Petition is disposed of. i(2014) 8 scc 273 4 SCR, J Crlp E039 2026
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shal1 stand closed. "'-ot3,t='iNYA:e,8iRRI //TRUE COPY// sEcrlo N OFFICER 1 \ To, Asifabad District '1 . The.ftdiciel Magistrate of First Class' Sirpur Town' 2. The Statlon House Otflcli, pofi"" Stution' Kagaznagar' Kumrambheem 3. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor' High Court for the State of Telangana at 4 ljl',; #;; ils VenosE sANJANA Advocate (oPUc) 5. Two CD CoPies Hvderabad (OUT) TPI(/KA HIGH COURT DATED: 2910512026 ORDER CRLP.No.8039 of 2026 teR 1lr€ s 14 o U 0 6 JU|J 2026 t; i) .so41.6H gO t t( P z. C). ^ CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSING OF ?v\*
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingl)', the Criminal Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 35(3), 482; Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Telangana High Court, on 29 May 2026. The bench was VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO.
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.