Disposed

Mohammed Salman Baggan Alias Solman Bhagan v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC20 Jun 2025CRLP/7481/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of FIR proceedings or protection from coercive action, contending no Section 35(3) BNSS notice was issued despite the offences being punishable with less than seven years imprisonment. The court directed them to appear before the SHO within a week, on which notice under Section 35(3) BNSS shall be issued per Arnesh Kumar guidelines.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mohammed Salman Baggan Alias Solman Bhagan Vs The State… — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

I I I t I I l

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7481 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mohammed Salman Baggan Alias Solman Bhagan, S/o. Mohammed Mustaq Bagan, Aged aboul 24 years, Occ private employee, R/o. 5-1^'12, Dundigal, Quthbullapur, Medchal Malkajgiri District, Telangana 500043

¶9

Mohammed Mustaq Bagan alias Mushtaq, S/o. Mohammed Khurshith Baggan, Aged about 58 years, Occ^private employee, Rlo. 5-112, Dundigal, Quthbullapur. Medchal Malkajgiri District, Telangana 500043.

¶10

Md. Sadique alias Sadiq, S/o. Mohammed Ghouse. Aged about 28^years, Occ private employee, R/o. H.No.4-68, Jinnarama, Gummadidala, Medak District, Telangana 502313

¶11

I\4d. Arbaz Bagan Alias Arbaz, S/o. Mustaq Bagan. Aged about 27^years, Occ private employee, R/o. 5-1 12, Dundigal, Quthbullapur, Medchal Malkajgiri District' Telangana 500043

¶12

...^{petitioners/Accused} Nos. 1 to 4

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Telangana,, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad

¶15

.....Respondent No.1

¶16

Mohammed Khaled, S/o Moinuddin, Age 24 years, Occ Private employee, R/o Prakashambazaar, Nalgonda

¶17

......Respondent No.2/Complainant

¶18

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Quash the proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 4 in FIR No.'155 of 2025 dated 14.06.2025 before the Nalgonda I Town Police Station, Nalgonda District, in the interest of^justice.

¶19

l.A. NO: 2OF 2025

¶20

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all furthbr proceedings including arrest of the Petitioners/ Accused No.1 to 4 in FIR No.155 of 2025 dated 14.06.2025 before the Nalgonda I Town Police Station, Nalgonda District, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶21

==7

¶22

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri SHAIK SHAREEF, Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri. JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA, the Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2.

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

..i^{.- i"n;rE}

¶25

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶26

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 7481 oF 2025

¶27

ORDER

¶28

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 52g of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS, 2023') seeking quashment of the proceedings in Crime No.'155 of 2025 of Nalgonda I Town Police Station, Nalgonda District, against the petitioners.

¶29

The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No-155 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections^.137(2), 127(2),351(2),118(1) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS, 2023').

¶30

Heard Mr. Shaik Shareef, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioners respectfully submits that although the petitioners are fully committed to cooperating with the investigative process, they are apprehensive of potential coercive action being taken against them. This concern arises from the fact that, despite the alleged offence being punishable with imprisonment for a term less than seveh years, the investigating police authority has not yet issued any notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nrg"r[

¶32

¶33

--r^\J:E!!H 'q'.+ .1.9:t ..' \ \

¶34

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). lt is further submitted that the petitioners have no intention of evading the investigation and are willing to extend full cooperation to the authorities. ln light of these circumstances, Iearned counsel prays that appropnate directions be issued to the concerned police officials to proceed in accordance with law by issuing a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, thereby safeguardinll the petitioners from any unwarranted coercive measures.

¶35

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition

¶36

I havc, perused the materials on record

¶37

Considering that the alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment for a term less than seven years, and in view of the petitioners' willingness to participate in the investigative process, the petitioners are hereby directed to appear before the Station House Officer (SHO), Nalgonda I Town Police Station, Nalgonda District, within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon such appearance, the lnvestigating Officer shall issue notice to the petitioners under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, in connection with Crime No.155 of 2025, and shall proceed further strictly in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. Slale of Bihar, [(2014) I SCC 273]. Simuttaneously, the

¶38

¶39

,\ .. ?\i:{^..:'

¶40

petitioners are directed to extend full cooperation to the lnvestrgating

¶41

Officer during the course of the investigation.

¶42

With this direction, this Criminal Petition is disposed of.

¶43

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed

¶44