Syed Shabbir Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

SYED SHABBIR, S/O. LATE MAHAMOOD,AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS,RESIDENT OF 40, 8-3168/E/C, RAJEEV NAGAR,YOUSUF GUDA POST, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE.

¶10

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, AP HIGH COURT, AMARAVATHI.

¶13

DUDIA PRASAD, W/O. VENKAIAH,AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS,RESIDENT OF D.NO. 32-11/4-1, GUMMADI VARI STREET,MOGALRAJPURAM, VIJAYAWADA, NTR, DISTRICT.

¶14

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):

¶15

Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to call for the records in FIR. No. 51 of 2026, on the file of Cyber Crime Police Station, NTR District, Andhra Pradesh and quash the same, and pass

¶16

2

¶17

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶18

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the filing of the certified copies of the Complaint and FIR vide No. 51 of 2026 pending before the Cyber Crime, NTR District and pass

¶19

IA NO: 2 OF 2026

¶20

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant of stay all further proceedings in Crime. No. 51 of 2026, on the file of Cyber Crime Police Station, NTR District, Andhra Pradesh pending disposal of this Memorandum of Criminal Petition, and pass

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

¶22

1.ALMAS BEGUM MOHAMMED

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1.K. R. RAGHAVENDRA RAO 2.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶24

3

¶25

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶26

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5125 of 2026

¶27

The Court made the following Order:

¶28

Instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023, has been filed on behalf of the petitioner herein/A5 to quash the proceedings in Crime (FIR) No.51 of 2026 of Cyber Crime Police Station, NTR Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) & 319(2), of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 and Section 66 read with 43 of Information Technology Act, 20002008.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing for some time, has confined his argument to the extent of protecting the petitioner herein from the police on the ground that the offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven (07) years and prays this Court to direct the police to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶30

On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor did not oppose the same and concurred with the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner for the reason that the

¶31

4

¶32

offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment of less than

¶33

seven years.

¶34

Heard. Perused the entire available material on record.

¶35

Since the offences alleged are punishable with

¶36

imprisonment of less than seven years and in view of the no objection expressed by the Assistant Public Prosecutor, this Court directs the respondent/police to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 41A Cr.P.C., scrupulously as per the guidelines enunciated in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another¹ , which was reiterated in the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Md.Asfak Alam Vs. State

¶37

of Jharkhand and Another² .

¶38