[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Telangana High Court
Gollapelli Srikanth vs The State Of Telangana on 6 April, 2026
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4908 of 2026
DATE: 06.04.2026
Between :
Gollapelli Srikanth and three others
....Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4
AND
The State of Telangana,
Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad and another
....Respondents
:ORDER:
This criminal petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused
Nos.1 to 4 seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners
in F.I.R.No.108 of 2025 of Karimnagar Women, Karimnagar District,
registered for the offences under Sections 85 read with 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNS') and Section 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short, 'DP Act').
2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioners and
the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the criminal petition is
disposed of at the stage of admission.
3. Heard Mr. T. Rahul, learned counsel for the petitioners, and
Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for respondent No.1.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
petitioners have not committed the alleged offences and have been
falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to the
allegations made in the complaint, the ingredients for the offences
under Sections 85 read with 3(5) of the BNS and Section 4 of the DP
Act are not attracted against the petitioners. Respondent No.2 herself
voluntarily left the matrimonial house of petitioner No.1. Even
according to the allegations levelled in the complaint occurred in the
months of January, May and June of 2025, whereas, respondent
No.2 lodged the complaint after long time, which is in the month of
September 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioners further
submitted that the offences leveled against the petitioners are
punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. However, the
Investigating Officer, without following the mandatory procedure
prescribed under Section 35(3) of the BNSS/41(A) of the Cr.P.C, the
guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of
Bihar 1, the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Md.
Asfak Alam v. The State of Jharkhand & another (Crl.A.No.2207 of
2023) dated 31.07.2023, and also the circular issued by this Court in
ROC.No.1399/SO/2023 dated 09.08.2023, is proceeding with the
investigation, which is contrary to law. In support of his contentions,
1(2014) 8 SCC 273
learned counsel relied upon the principle laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in Charul Shukla v. State of U.P. and Ors 2.
5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that
there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioners to attract
the ingredients for the offences under Sections 85 read with 3(5) of
the BNS and Section 4 of the DP Act. The de facto complainant
specifically mentioned that in May, 2025 petitioner No.1 forcefully
necked out her from the matrimonial house and on 14.06.2025 a
panchayat was conducted in the presence of elders. The petitioners
along with other accused insisted respondent No.2 for additional
dowry and harassed her physically and mentally. The said allegations
prima facie attracts the ingredients especially the investigation is
under progress. At this stage, the petitioners are not entitled to seek
quashing of the proceedings.
6. He further submits that the Investigating Officer tried to serve
the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to the petitioners, but the
petitioners are not coming forward to receive the notice and not co-
operating with the investigation and that the Investigating Officer will
follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and
the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar
2026 SCC OnLine SC 476
(supra) and requested this Court to direct the petitioner to cooperate
with the investigation.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners by way of reply submitted
that the petitioners will receive the notice and submit their
reply/explanation.
8. Having considered the rival submissions made by the
respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on
record, it reveals that the offences leveled against petitioners are
punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Thus,
without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 are directed to appear before the
Investigating Officer, on or before 18.04.2026, and on such
appearance, the Investigating Officer is entitled to issue notice under
Section 35(3) of BNSS/41-A of Cr.P.C., and follow the guidelines
issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). In view
of the same, petitioners are entitled to submit their reply to the
notice by raising all the pleas which are available to them and they
are is also entitled to submit the documents, which are in their
custody. The Investigating Officer is further directed to scrupulously
follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS
and the guidelines and principles issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court
in Arnesh Kumar (supra) and Md. Asfak Alam (supra), and
conclude the investigation.
9. Subject to the above directions, the Criminal Petition is
disposed of.
Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.
______________________
J.SREENIVAS RAO, J
Dated: 06.04.2026
Note:
Issue CC in 3 days
B/o. gnp
