High Court · 2025

The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Rangareddy. The Station House Officer, Police Station Nacharam, Rangareddy. Smt. Divina _D Costa, D/o .Late Theofila D Costa, Age. 55 years, Occ. Counselling. Psychologist, Rtio. ptot No. 36, nrul Coton"y, Opp.'Si i.;"r, School, ECIL, Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularty one in the nature of writ of certiorari, calling for the record in FIR No. zszt2o24 registered 3rd respondent against petitioners and declaring the same as illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable and consequently Quash FIR No. zs2t2o24 of ps Nacharam, Rangareddy initiated against the Petitioners/Accused No.3 and 4. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the )ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High CoL 1 may be pleased to grant order to stay of further investigation in FIR No. 75211'.1 24 of PS Nacharam, Rangareddy against petitioners/A3 and A4, pending di posal of main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. C.PREETHI REDDY, REP. I:r )R SRI CH.VENKAT REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: SRI SRIDHAR BHU! ANAGIRI, AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.4: - The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT TTYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO WRIT PETITION No.39 15O of 2O25 Date:19.12.2025 Between: Bandari Chandra Shekhar and others 'I'he State of Telangana, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad and others. AND Pe titioners ...Respondents ORDER This Writ Petition is hled seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.7S2 of 2024, on the file of the Nacharam Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.3 and 4, for the offences punishable under Sections 3lg(21, 318(4), 336(2l,, 336(3), 340(2),338 r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023.

2. Heard I\f,s1Q.preethi Reddy, learned counsel representing Mr.Ch.Venkat Reddy, learned counsel for thc 2 petitioners ancl Mr.Sridhar Bhuavanagiri, lear': Led 'Assistant Government Pleadcr for Home for respondent llos l to 3'

3. Learnecl counsel lor the petitioners sullnr tted that the petitioners have t-rot committed any offence a t d have bcen falsely implicated in the present case. He furt^:r submitted that the petitioners have not forged or ftr lricarted any document and the ingredients for the offence - nder Section 338 r/w 3(5) of BNS does not attract' Tht punishment prescribed for the other offences alleged against the petitioners is less than seven (O7) years, the nvestigating Officer, withotrt following the due p - rcedure as contemplated under Section 4l A of tt (' Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short,'Cr.P'C'')/Sertion 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short' 'BNSS) and also the guidelines formulated ry the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. Sto:te of Bihcrl,r proceeded with the investigation and the same is contrar"' to law' 1(2014 ) 8 scc 273 7 3

4. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted whether the petitioner has committed the alleged offence or not, has to be ascertained only during the course of investigation. It is contended that the petitioners along with the other accused, pursuant to a conspiracy, created forged and fabricated documents to claim the rights over the property over the mother of the de facto complainant. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashment of the proceedings at this threshold

5. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that there are no specific allegations against the petitioners that they forged and labricated the document. The only allegation is that there is conspiracy between the petitioners and the other accused created lorged ald fabricated documents, ancl basing on the lorged documents accused No.l is claiming rights over the property. Hence, this Court is of the prima facie vrew that the ingredients for the olfence under Section 338 of BNS may not attract against the petitioners and the I punishment prescribed for the other rt Iences alieged against the petitioners is less than seven (Oi ) years

6. Taking into consideration of the pecr liar facts and clrcumstances of the case, the petitioners / rccused Nos.3 and 4 are directed to appear before thc Investigating Oflrcer, on or ltefore 31.

12.2025, and on su:rt appea_rance, the Investigating Oflicer is directed to issu.: notice ur_rder Section 41-A of the Cr.p.C./Section 35(3) ol rhc ITNSS and follow the guidelines issued b-y the Apex Cor rt in Arnesh Kumar supra.

7. It is made clear that the petitioners ar : entitlecl to srlbmit repl.y/ explanation along with the docr-rr tcnts, which are available with him, to thc Investigating Ofli :er.

8. If the petitioners fail to appear before the I nvestigating Officer, within the stipulated time, the Investrglr Lting Officer is entitled to proceed with the proceedings ir: accordance with law 9 Accorclingl_r., the Writ petition is disposecl r, ) Misccllaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. To, SD/.A.H.S.GOWRI S SSISTANT KAR ISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 'l . The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Tela 2. The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Commissi 3. The Station House Officer, Police Station Nacharam, Rangareddy. 4. Bandari Chandra Shekhar, S/o. Bandari Babu, Age. 2l yearc, Occ. Business, R:/o- H.No.10-7-49, Shiva Shanker Nagar Colonyl Fathdr Nagar, Bala Nagar, Hyderabad. State of Telangana rate, Rangareddy.

5. S. Radha Krishna, S/o. Sangam Krishna Goud, Age. 42 yeats, Occ. Business, R:io. H. No. 8- I -27 3lB I 4, Dwaraka Nagar, Shaikpet, Golcohda, Hyderabad.

6. One CC to SRI CH.VENKAT REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to cP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Tetangana at Hyderabad [OUTj

8. Two CD Copies BSR HIGH COURT DATED: 1911212025 CC TODAY ORDER WP.No.39150 of 2025 r.A t J ) I t0 il?5 E? 1,., '-, lr \:\. , I -.i- -! -a.- ' .:, ../., "i-. ,' ,.:. ,| . ,,/ 'i' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION' WITHOUT COSTS ^t