Smt.Gajula Ramadevi Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.Gajula Venu Kumar, S/o. late Pedda Raja Narsaiah, Aged 49 years, Occ: Pvt. Employee, R/o. 9-5, Rudarangi Village and Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District, Telangana

¶10

Gajula Prem alias Gajula Harindran, S/o. Venu Kumar, Aged 25 years, Occ: Student, FVo. 9-5, Rudarangi Village and Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District, Telangana.

¶11

Gajula Bablu alias Gajula Koushik, S/o. Venu Kumar, Aged 23 years, Occ: Student, R/o. 9-5, Rudarangi Villane and Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District, Telangana.

¶12

...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED

¶13

AND

¶14

L The State of Telangana,, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High C,ourt At Hyderabad

¶15

Chinthakindi Mounika, D/o. Late Narayana, Aged 36 years, Occ: Doctor, Rl/o H.No.4-1-190, Vani. Nagar, Jagitial Town and District.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶17

Petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to Crime No 368/2025 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, At Korutla for the alleged offences under Section 331(4), 324(4) rlw 3(5) BNS.and quash the same in so far'as the petitioners/Accused are concerned.

¶18

l.A NO: 1OF 2025

¶19

Petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. praying that in the circumstances stated.in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including the appearance of the

¶20

petitioners/accused in Crime No 368/2025 on the file of Judicial First Ctass Magistrate, At Korutla for the alleqed offences under Section 331(r), 324(4) rlw 3(5) BNS

¶21

This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Ravi Gadeela ,Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

AN

v

AT

THEHONOURABLESRIJUSTICEJ.SREENIVASRAo

PE N 18 of

Datez 05.12.2025

B

Smt.Gajula Ramadevi^{and another}

¶31

..petitioners

¶32

AND

¶33

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public^Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad^{and another}

¶34

.respondents

¶35

ORDER

¶36

This Criminal Petition^{has been filed seeking to quashthe}

¶37

proceedings in crime^{No.368 of 2025,on the file of KorutlaPolice} Station, wherein^{the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.l to 4,} for the offences^{punishable under Sections 331 (4) and 324 (4) r/w'} 3 (5) of Bharatiya^{Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS')'}

¶38

Heard Mr.G.Ravi,^{learnedcounsel for the petitionersand} Mr.Jithendar Rao^{Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public}

¶39

Prosecutor for^{resPondentNo.1.}

¶40

Learned counsel^{for the petitioners submitsthat the}

¶41

oetitioners have a<sup>not committed any offenceand have been falsely \

¶42

j rf! ii.

¶43

2

¶44

implicatecl in this crime. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted. He further submits that petitioner No.l purchased the property fiom the grandmother of the de facto complainant under a registered sale deed dated 12.12.2024, and since then she has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property. Respondent No.2 has no semblance of right over the said property. Even as per the complaint, the ingredients of the offences under Sections 331(4) and 324(4) read with 3(5) are nor attracted. The nature of the allegations is purely civil in nature. Hence, the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners amounts to a clear abuse of the^process of law.

¶45

Per contra, the leamed Additional^{public prosecutor} submits that offences levelled against the petitiOners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. The Investigating officer has also issued notice under section 35(3) of the BNSS to petitioner Nos. I and 2laccused Nos.l and 2, and they received the said notice on 17.1r.2025. The petitioner Nos.l and 2/accused Nos.l and 2 are entitled to put forth their grievance by way of a reply. The Investigating officer will conduct the investigation in

,

3

i i I I I i

accordance with the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex Court inArnesh Kumar Vs. State of Biha/.

¶50

\

¶51

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 petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Since notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS has already been issued to petitioner Nos.l and 2laccused Nos.l and 2 on 17 .11.2025, this Courr is of the considered view that petitioner Nos.3 and 4/accused Nos.3 and 4 are directed to appear before the Investigating oflicer, on or before 17.12.2025, and on such appearance, the Investigating Officer is entitled to issue notice under Section 4l-Aof Cr.P.C./Section 35(3) of BNSS and follow the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumor supra.

¶52

It is ntade clear that the petitioners are entitled to submit reply/explanation along with the documents, which are available with them, to the Investigating Officer.

¶53

If the petitioners fail to appear before the Investigating Officer, within the stipulated time, the Investigating Officer is entitled to take action against them in accordance with law. ' lzot+1^{8 scc273}

¶54

4

¶55