Disposed

Yetukuri Rajesh v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC11 Sept 2026WP/30274/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Writ Petition and Section 151 CPC application, the High Court of Telangana directed the respondent police to issue a notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS to petitioners facing offences punishable with less than seven years, strictly following the Arnesh Kumar guidelines before taking action.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent authorities to issue notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS and follow guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar before taking any action against the petitioners. No order as to

Yetukuri Rajesh Vs The State of Telangana — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

t^321e I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TANGIRALA MADHAVI DEVI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 30274 OF 2026

¶8

Between:

¶9

Yetukuri Rajesh, S/o. Y.Devadanaiah, Aged about 41 yrs, Occ. Business, Rt/o H,No. 1-3l2, Thimmarayapahad Village, Chennaraopeta Mandal, Warangal District.

¶10

2, Yetukuri Rajitha, D/o Y. Devadanaiah, Aged about 39yrs, Occ. Business, Ri/o H.No.^'l -3l2, Thimmarayapahad Village, Chennaraopeta Mandal, Warangal District.

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

'1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Hyderabad.

¶14

The Station House Officer, Domalguda Police Station, Hyderabad District.

¶15

Vesapogu Dayakar Rao, S/o not known, Aged about. Major, Occ. Director, New Edge Overseas Consultancy Pvt Ltd., FVo D.No.3-6-518, Flat No.208, Sai Pragathi Towers, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in trying to anest the Petitioners/A2 and 44 highhandedly in connection with Cr.No. 25212026 on the file of 2nd respondent Police Station without following the procedure contemplated under Sec.35 (3) of BNSS, and in contrary to the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar V/s. State of Bihar as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and

¶18

violation of Article 14 and 21 of constitution of lndia and consequenfly direct the 2nd respondent to follow the procedure contemplated U/Sec.3S (3) of BNSS, in relation to the cr No. 25212026 dated 27.07.2026 as against the petitioners/A2 and A4.

¶19

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2026

¶20

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the 2nd Respondent to fc,llow the procedure contemplated U/Sec.35 (3) of BNSS and guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex court in Arnesh Kumar vs. state of Bihar in relation to cr.No. 252'2026, dt.27 07.2026 of Domalguda police Station, registered against the petitioner:;/A2 and 44 on the file of 2nd respondent,s potice station, pending disposal of ther above writ petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SANJEEVA REDDy GARLAPATI

¶22

Counsel for the Resprrndent Nos.1 & 2: AGp FOR HOME

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR TIIE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶25

THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TANGIRALA MADHAVI DEVI

¶26

WRIT PETITION N0.30274 of 2026

¶27

(CNR No. HBHC010625572026)

¶28

DATE:11.09.2026

¶29

Between:

¶30

Yetukuri Raj esh and another

¶31

Petitioners

¶32

AND

¶33

The State ofTelangana and others

¶34

Respondents

¶35

:: ORDER::

¶36

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶37

"...to issue an apprapriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandomus, declaring the action of the 2'd resporulent in trying to drrest the Petitioners/A2 & A4 highhandedly in connection with Cr.No.252/2026 on the file of ld respondent Police Station without .following the procedur.e contemplated under Sec.35(j) of BNSS and in contrary tu the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar V/s. State of Bihar as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Article I 4 and 2l of Constitution of India and consequentll' direct the 2nd respondent to follow the procedure contemplated U/Sec.j5(3) of BNSS in relation to the Cr.No.252/2026 dated 27.07.2026 as against the Petitioners/A2 & A4, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem /it and proper in the circumstances of the case ".

¶38

Ileard leamed counsel for the petitioners and leamed Assistant

¶39

Government Pleader for Home, appearing for respondents No. I and 2.

¶40

TMD,I wP 30274 2026

¶41

¶42

Leamed counsel for the petitioners submitted that the offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable with less than seven⁽⁰⁷⁾ years of impri:;onment and therefore, the respondent-police may be directed to issue notice under Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhjta, 2023, (for short, "BNSS") to the^petitioners and lollow the guicclines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh

¶43

Kumar v. Stale of Bihorl

¶44

Leamed ,,\ssistant Govemment Pleader for Home submitted that since the ofl-ences alleged against the petitioners are punishable with less than seven t07) years of imprisonment, the respondent police will follow due pro(ess of law and issue notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS as well as the guidelines issued by the l-Ion'ble Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar^(ciled supra).

¶45

ln view thereof, this Court deems it fit and proper to dispose of this Writ Petition at the admission stage, with a direction to respondent authc'rities to issue notice to the petitioners under Section 35(3) of BNSS and to strictly follow the guidelines laid down by the

'^{(2014) 8} scc 27j

TMDJ wP _3027⁴ _2026

Hon'ble Supreme^{Courtin the case of ArneshKumar (ciledsupra)}

¶50

before taking any^{actionagainst the petitioners.}

¶51

With the above directions,^{this Writ Petition is disposed of.}

¶52

There shall be no order^{as to costs.}

¶53

Miscellaneous applications,^{if any, pending shallstand closed}

¶54

//TRUE^COPY//

¶55

SD/. P.PRAMOD^NAIK ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR G

SECTION^OFFICER

To,

The^{Principal Secretary, Department of Home'Hyderabad' Stateof} Telangana.

¶60

The^{Station HouseOfficer' Domalguda Police Station' Hyderabad District'}

¶61

One^{CC to SRI SANJEEVA REDDY GARLAPATI' AdvocateIOPUCI}

¶62

Two^{CCs to GP FOR HOME' High Court for the State of Telangana' at} Hyderabad [OUTI

¶63

Two^{CD CoPies}

BSR

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1110912026

ORDER

WP.No.30274 of 2026

1 H e S TA 14:
a
oo t1 SEP 2UI6 o2
.L
t
t DFs AT c gQ

¶71

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION,

¶72

WITHOUT COSTS

¶73

11
6
3\ ,tt

Yetukuri Rajesh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yetukuri Rajesh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases