Hyderabad High Court · 2025

in the Me'rnorandurn of Grouncls of Criminal Pctition, the High Court mav be pleased to call for the rc'colds in conrrection ivith F.I.R.No.137 of 2025, datccl l8- 06-2025 on the file of S.H.O. Varni I)olicc Station, Nizamabad District and tluash the same. I.A. NO: 2OF 2025 Petition urrcler Section 528 of BNSS praving that in the circumstances stated in the Mernorandum of Grouncls of Criminal Petition, the I'Iigh Court rla-v be :y pleased to grant sta)' ()l all further proceerlings in connectior.r w,ith F.[.R.No. 137 of 2025, dated 18-06-202-i on the file'of S.FI.O. Varni Pol;,.-.,Station, Nizan.rabad District, pending clisLrosal of thc atrove crirninal petitit,rn. This l']etition cr.lrning on for heanng, up6n 1rcrusir'rl the N4erlorandurn of Grounds of Criminal I'}r'tition .r ltcl uPon hearine the ;rrgut.rr,r'rts of Sri Vacllakcrnrla Ravi Kumar Recldy, r\tlvoca tt' tor tlte Petitioner ;inc1 N,ir . J Lirncle'r Rao Veera mala Aclclitional the I'ublic l)rosecutor on behalf of the Respcntlent No.1 ar-rcl of the Responder-rt No.2 not aI)frearing ir-r 1-re15611 or through het'cl:rnsel. The Court made the loll,.rrt.in<, ORDER .E-:.Fr:7 \-::a 7 HON'BLE SMT, JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10086 ot 2025 ORDER This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.137 of 2025 on the file of Varni Police Station, Nizamabad, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 85 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Section 4 of D.P. Act

2. Heard Sri Vadlakonda Ravi Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No. 1- State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the de- facfo complainant has filed this petition only to harass the petitioners. He further submitted that though lhe de-facto complainant left the conjugal society of her husband in 2019 itself, she filed the present complaint in the year 2025 against the petitioner with all omnibus allegations nearly after seven (07) Y;-'ffi 's; 2 I]TD, J ( rlP 100S6 2025 years. He also submitted that petitioner No..l filed H.M.O.p No..1 1 of 2022 for restoration of conjugal rights, which v,,as allowed by the trial Court, however, the de-faclo complainant did not comply with the orders of the Court and that it shows the d s,nterest of the de-facto complainant in joining the conjugat s;ociety of the petitioner. Hence, he prayed to quash the procer_.dings against the petitioners.

4. On the other hand, learned Additional public prosecutor had opposed the submissions made by the learnr:c counsel for the petitioners stating that the orders passed by the trial Court in H.lVl.O.P.No.11 of 2022 restoring conjugal rights are ex_pafte orders without serving any notice to the de-facfo cornplainant. He further submitted that since the legal notice rssued by the petitioners clearly shows that the petitioner's husbarnd is living with another lady, the question of continuing relationship with the petitioner No.1 would be at the discretion of tl.re deiacto complainant. He also submitted that the notice u.rder Section 35(3) of BNSS was already served to the petitioner \o.1. Hence, he prayed the Court to issue notice under Section ll5(3) of the BNSS in respect of other petitioners. --a:ry 3 ETD, ] Crll'} 10086 2025

5. Considering the submissions of both the counsel and on perusal of the material available on record, it is seen that the allegations point out an offence under Section 85 of BNS. The petitioner No.'1 is the husband and other petitioners are the in- laws of the de-facto complainant. A perusal of the copy of the orders passed in H.M.O.p.No.11 of 2022 restoring conjugal rights under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act discloses that it is an ex-parte decree. Further, lhe de4acto complainant alleges adultery against the petitioner No.1. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct I the petitioners to appear before the lnvestigating Officer on or before 25.08.2025 between 11:00 a.m. and 05:00 p.m. and in turn, the lnvestigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure laid down under Section 35 (3) of the BNSS and also the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of lndia in Arnesh Kumar y. Sfafe of Biharl scrupulously. However, the petitioners shall submit their defense and co_operate with the ' lzor+y s scc zz: \-=F-l \- i-^l ' }(r: 'I ':i :: 4 EID,.I c rlt' I i)036 202.5 lnvestigating Officer as and when required by furnishing information and produce all relevant documents/nraterial required for the purpose of the investigation and the lnvestigating Officer shall consider the same and shall complete the investigation strictly in accordance with law.

6. With the above observations, this Criminal petirion is disposed of There shall be no order as to costs 7 As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. AI{MED ABDULLA KHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 //rRUE COPv / / SITC.TION OIrl:lCIlR -I'o, Judicial Irirst ClassMagishater at Bodhan. -fhe 'l he Station Flousc Officer, Varni Police Station, Niza labad. Or-re CC to Sri Vadlakonda Ravi Kutnar Reclcly, Aclvt':rttt' [()l'UC] Or-re CC to the Public Prosecutor, High Court Builclir-ris I [r t]<rrabacl Tn,o CD Copies.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CK/ IoPUC] E\i HIGH COURT IIA I'F.D:1 t /08/20?5 ORDtTR CR LI'. N"o. 1 0086 oi 202c Disposing of the Criminirl Pctition v () ,/ .:, t, I ., t [4 l\llv \\ t, c,