V .P. Nagendrudu, S/o. Late v. Ramalingam, Aged

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

2. V .P. Nagendrudu, S/o. Late- V. Ramalingam, Aged 49 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. Flat No. G-7, Bhavyas Akhila Exotica, D.No. 1-2-22|BAE, Hyder Nagar, Hyderabad ...RespondenUCom plainants Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. R/VV 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 impugned proceedings in FIR No. 1131 of 2025, on the file of the Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerale, in so far the petitioners / Accused Nos. 1 to 3 are concerned. l.A. NO: 2OF 2025 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. R/YV 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 grant interim stay of all further proceedings in FIR No. 1'1 31 of 2025, on the file of the Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Including arrest, appearance and attendance of the petitioners / Accused 1 to 3, pending disposal of the above Criminal petition _ This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing .re Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the argumr: rts of Mr. c. Raghu representing Mr. S. Srikanth Reddy, Advocate for the )etitioners and the Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional public prosecLt )r on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of None appeared for the Responden ilo. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR TTIE STATE OF TELANGANA ATHYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRTMINAL PETITION No .16685 ot2025 Date: 15. 12.2025 Between: K.V.V.Nageshwara Rao and two others The State ofTelangana, Rep. by its public prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad and another. AND Order ...Petitioners ...Respondents This Criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No,l l3l of 2025, on the file of the Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.l to 3, for the offences punishable under Sections 127(2),329(t),329(3),351(l), 352 and 351(2) r/w 3 ofthe Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023, Sections 3(l)(r)(s), 3(l)(f)(g) and 3(1)(zc) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, I9g9 and Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023. \ ..'t.. \]-\ s-l _r=.. ri

2. Heard Mr.C.Raghu, learned Senior Couns,: representing Mr.S.Srikanth Reddy, learned counsel for the r :titioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Ptl lic Prosecutor for respondent No. 1-State.

3. Leamed Senior Counsel for the petitioners sutr; nitted that the petitioners have not committed the alleged offences z nd respondent No. 2 has falsely implicated them in the present crr re in order to settle the civil disputes pending between him and t re petitioners. Hence, continuation of proceedings against the petiti r rers is a clear abuse ofprocess of law.

4. Per contra,learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the offences levelled against the petitioners are pL rishable with imprisonment of less than seven years and. the Inves.i ;ating Officer had already issued notice under Section 4l-A ol' the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.')/Sectiorr 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ' )NSS') to the petitioner No.liaccused No.l on 03.12.2025 and peti ioner/accused No.1 is entitled to submit reply along with the docum: rts, which are available with him. He further submitted that petiticr er Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 and accused No.4 are abscc,r ding and the : 3 l. Investigating Officer will follow the procedure contemplated under Section 4l-A of rhe Cr.p.C./Section 35(3) of the BNSS and guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihart insofar as other accused is concemed.

5. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the offences levelled against the petitioners ate punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years.

6. Upon perusal of the written instructions fumished by the Inspector of Police, Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, which were produced by the leamed Additional Public Prosecutor, it reveals that petitioner No.l/accused No.l received notice under Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C./Section 35(3) of the BNSS on03.12.2025. I I I

7. In view of the same, the petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and 3 are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer, on or before 22.12.2025, and on such appearance, the Investigating Officer I I is entitled to issue notice under Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C./Section 12014) I scc 273 -r-\.*1 \: \ \ 4 35(3) of the BNSS and follow the guidelines issui,< by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar supra.

8. It is made clear that the petitioners are enti led to submit reply/explanation along with the documents, which are available with them, to the Investigating Officer.

9. If the petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.2 and I fail to appear before the Investigating Officer, within the stipuir ted time, the Investigating Officer is entitled to take action al rinst them ln accordance with law.

10. Subject to the above directions, the Crimir: rl Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shalt stand closed. I D/- B. REKHA RANI ASSI ;TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Rajendranagar. 1' The Xil Additionar Judiciar Magistrate of First crass, R.Fl. District at 2. The Station House Officer, Raidurgam police Station, C1t erabad. 3' Two ccs to the pubric prosecutorlstrte ot-ieiaiglna, rr 7h court Buirdings, 1. 9n" CC to Mr. S. Srikanth Reddy, Advocate IOPUCI 5. Two CD Copies at Hyderabad (OUT) 19, L I I f i1E Si4 o 1 ? 0i'J ilr ii I 't. HIGH COURT JSR, J DATED:1511212025 ORDER CRLP.No.16685 ot 2025 CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF