✦ Telangana High Court

Mlr Haseebuddin Hyder v. The State of Telangana

Criminal Petition No. 8648 of 2025N TUKARAMJI4 min read

Case at a glance

Bench
N TUKARAMJI

Outcome

Disposed of

With this direction, this Criminal Petition is disposed of

Key paragraphs

  • Para 88. With this direction, this Criminal Petition is disposed of Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed To, Sd/- S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO ANT REGISTRAR A //TRUE COPY' SECTION OFFICER

Judgment

2.

M. Dhanu Shekhar, S/o Srinivas Aged about 36 yrs, Occ Nil, R/o Mudimyala Chevella Mandal, Vikarabad District. Mobile no.837 457 BB7 4 ...RESPONDENTS 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 call for the entire records relating to FIR No. 140 ot 2025 ' pending on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge Cum Judicial First Class Magistrate, Pargi, Vikarabad District and Quash the same l.A. NO: 2OF 2025 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 Stay all further proceedings in FIR No.140 ol 2025 pending on the file of the court of the Junior civil Judge cum Judicial First class Magistrate, Pargi, Vikarabad District, pending quash petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri MOHAMMAD ADNAN, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA, Assistant Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and none appeared for Respondent no.2 The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI CRIMINAL PETITION No.8648 OF 2025 ORDER This petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashment of the proceedings in FlR.No.140 ot 2025, on the file of learned Junior Civil Judge-cum- Judicial First Class lvlagistrate, Parigi, Vikarabad District against the petitioner/accused No.1 .

2. Heard Mr.Mohd. Adnan, learned counsel for petitioner, Itr'lr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

3.

The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1 in FlR.No.l40 of 2025 facing accusation under Sections 329(3), 324(4), 352, 351(2) r/w. 3(5) of BNS.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner respectfully submits that although the petitioner is fully committed to cooperate with the investigative process, he is apprehensive of potential coercive action being taken against him. This concern arises from the fact that, despite the alleged offence being punishable with imprisonment fg6, a term less than seven years, the investigating police authority has not yet issued any notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya 2 Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). lt is further submitted that the petitioner has no intention of evading the investigation and is willing to extend full cooperation to the authorities. ln light of these circumstances, learned counsel prays that appropriate directions be issued to the concerned police officials to proceed in accordance with law by issuing a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, thereby safeguarding the petitioner from any unwarranted coercive measures.

6.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition I have perused the materials on record

7.

Considering that the alieged offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term less than seven years, and in view of the petitioner's willingness to participate in the investigative process, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Station House Officer (SHO), Chengomul PS, Vikarabad District, within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon such appearance, the lnvestigating Officer shall issue notice to the petitioner under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, in connection with FlR.No.140 of 2025, and shall _ proceed further strictly in accordance with the guidelines laid down I I i I I i :+:Ln+.jlrlr 3 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Biharl . Simultaneously, the petitioner is directed to extend full cooperation to the lnvestigating Officer during the course of the investigation.

Operative part

8.

With this direction, this Criminal Petition is disposed of Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed To, Sd/- S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO ANT REGISTRAR A //TRUE COPY' SECTION OFFICER

1.

The Junior Civil Judge Cum Judicial First Class Magistrate, Pargi Vikarabad District.

2. The Station House Officer, Chengomul P.S., Vikarabad District. 3 One CC to SRI MOHAMMAD ADNAN Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for the State of Telangana IouT]

5.

Two CD Copies MKN/ABK ' (2014) 8 scc 273 HIGH COURT DATED:1 110712025 ORDER I 30JUI m CRLP.No.8648 of 2025 \' (1\ .: :/ DISPOSING THE CRTMINAL PETITION

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: With this direction, this Criminal Petition is disposed of

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 35(3), 528; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Telangana High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Criminal Petition No. 8648 of 2025). ← Search more judgments