Mamidi Subba Reddy vs The State Of Telangana
2026 Latest Caselaw 752 Tel

Telangana High Court

Mamidi Subba Reddy vs The State Of Telangana on 15 April, 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
                AT HYDERABAD

     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

            CRIMINAL PETITION No.5618 of 2026

                         Date: 15.04.2026


Between:

Mamidi Subba Reddy
                                                   ...Petitioner
                                AND

The State of Telangana and another
                                                   ...Respondents

                             ORDER

This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the

proceedings in FIR No.85 of 2026 of Gachibowli Police Station,

Cyberabad, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as accused No.2, for

the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2) and 316(2)

of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS').

2. Heard Mr.G.Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner

and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent No.1.

3. With the consent of both the learned counsel, the criminal

petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner has not committed the alleged offences and has been

falsely implicated in the present crime. He further submitted that

there are no specific allegations against the petitioner, and his

name was not mentioned either in the complaint or in the FIR.

However, based on the confession statement given by accused

No.1, the petitioner was subsequently implicated as accused No.2.

The confession statement of a co-accused is not admissible under

Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Hence, the continuation of

proceedings against the petitioner amounts to a clear abuse of the

process of law.

5. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor

submitted that, though the petitioner was not arrayed as an accused

in Crime No.85 of 2026, during the course of investigation it was

revealed that there was a conspiracy between the petitioner and the

other accused, and they had committed the alleged offences.

Accordingly, the petitioner was subsequently arrayed as accused

No.2. He further submitted that the Investigating Officer had

already issued notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNSS") to the petitioner on

01.04.2026. He further submitted that the petitioner without

submitting reply/explanation to the said notice straightaway

approached this Court and filed the present criminal petition and

the same is not maintainable under law.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the

respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on

record, it reveals that the offences levelled against the petitioner

are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Even

according to the prosecution, the petitioner was arrayed as accused

No.2 during the course of investigation, based on the material

information available before the Investigating Officer and

Investigating Officer had already issued notice under Section 35(3)

of the BNSS to the petitioner on 01.04.2026.

7. In view of the same, the petitioner/accused No.2 is directed

to submit reply/explanation along with the documents, which are

available with him, to the Investigating Officer and the

Investigating Officer is entitled to follow the procedure as

contemplated under the provisions of the BNSS and also the

guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh

Kumar v. State of Bihar 1.

(2014) 8 SCC 273

8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO 15.04.2026

Note: Issue CC in three days b/o vsl