13303I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12578 OF 2026 Between: , 1. A.Laxmi, W/o Late Pochaiah Aged .64 yrs., Occ. Household R/o. 1-86-1 Fish Market, Shankarampet, Medak District (A-2) ...Petitioner/A-2 Rl/o. 5-2- 2. A. Venkateswari, Wo. B. John Aged . 44 yrs, Occ . Pvt. Employee 63, Dalita Basthi Premavatipet, Rajendranagar Ranga Reddy District (A'3) ,.. ...Petitioner/A-3 AND 1. The State of Telangana, Represented by Public Prosecutor High Court for the 1 State ofTelangana Hyderabad '.Respondent' . 49 Yrs., Occ . Pvt. Employee Rl/o. 2. Smt.P. Sangeetha, Wio. A. Bethaih, Aged Plot l..lo. 772-8, Phase-l Allwyn Colony, Kukatpally, Hyd.72 ...RespondenUGompiainant Petition under secticn 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 FIR No.704/2026 dated 1Sth July, 2026 on the file of the SHO, Alwal Police Station, l,ledchal-t\4alkajgiri, registered u/ s. 85 BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prchibition Act. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under section 528 of BNSs praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grouncs of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including the arrest of the petitioners in FIR NO. 70412026 dated 15th July,2026 on the fite of the SHO, Alwal police Station, Medchal-Malkajgiri pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. G V S Nagesh, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional public prosecutor on behalf ofthe Respondent No.1 and of None appeared forthe Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER t-- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.12578 of 2026 Date:05.08.2026 Between: A. Laxmi and another ...Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 AND The State of Telangana and alother. ..Respondents Order:

This Criminal Petition has been fiIed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (for short "the BNSS') by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.704 of 2026 of A1wal Police Station, Medchal-Malkajgiri, registered for tl.e offence punishable under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha,2023 (for short 'the BNSJ and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short DP Act'). 2. Heard Mr. G.V.S.Nagesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.1. ) -- 3. With their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed the alleged offences and have been fatsely implicated in the present case only on the ground that petitioners are the mother and sister of accused No.1. Respondent No.2 voluntarillr left the matrimonial house of accused No. 1 . At no point of time, the petitioners have harassed or abused respondent 1No.2 for additional dowry. He further submitted that accused No. filed F.C.O.P.No 309 of 2026 before the Additional District Judge-cum Famrly Court, Ranga Reddy District, at Kukatpally, seeking restitution of conjugal rights. After receiving the summons in the said case, respondent No.2 hled the present complaint by making omnlbus allegations. Hence the continuation of proceedings against the petitroners is a clear abuse of process of law. He further submitted that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. The Investigating Officer, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhrta, 2023 (for short 'BNSS) and without following the gnidelines formulated by the Hon'bie Supreme Court in Arnesh E7 3 Kumar Vs. S:tate o:f Blhor', is proceeding further in the matter and the same is contrary to law.

learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted 5. Per contra, in the complaint about that there are specific allegations levelled the harassment made by the petitioners against respondent No'2' Whether the allegations levelled against the petitioners are true or not, the same has to be revealed during the course of investigation quashment of and the petitioners are not entitled to seek proceedings against them at threshold, especially when the since investigation is under progress' He further submitted that' the offences leveled against petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven yea-rs, the Investigating Officer w.ill foliow the due procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and also the guidelines formulated by the Apex Court (suPra). ir Arnesh Kumar by the considere d the rival submissions made 6. Having 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' Even according to the iearned Additionat Public Prosecutor' the I ; \2014) 8 scc 273 4 Investigating Officer wants to follow the due procedure AS contemplated under the provisions of the 35(3) of the BNSS.

7 . In view of the same, the Investigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the BNSS, and a-1so the guidelines formulated by the Hon,ble Apex Court in Anresh Kumar lsupral in respect of petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 and the petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation. It is needless to mention that the petitioners are entitled to submit reply to the notice under Section 3S(3) of the BNSS by raising all the pleas which are available to them and they are also entitled to submit the documents, if any, which are in their custody, to the Investigating Officer. 8 Accordingly, the Criminal petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed Sd/- B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 The X Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Medchal Court, Medchal IVlalkjgiri District. 2 The Station House Officer, Alwal Police Station, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. 3 Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad (OUT) 4. One CC to Mr. G V S Nagesh, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies DLlVH HIGH COURT DATED: 0510812026 1t\r-:t"A t e vORDER )o AUE 2o2E L, 1 3 (il5 CRLP.No.12578 of 2026 * * 0t:.SPAI CRIMINAL PETITON IS DISPOSED OF yL

13303I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12578 OF 2026 Between: , 1. A.Laxmi, W/o Late Pochaiah Aged .64 yrs., Occ. Household R/o. 1-86-1 Fish Market, Shankarampet, Medak District (A-2) ...Petitioner/A-2 Rl/o. 5-2- 2. A. Venkateswari, Wo. B. John Aged . 44 yrs, Occ . Pvt. Employee 63, Dalita Basthi Premavatipet, Rajendranagar Ranga Reddy District (A'3) ,.. ...Petitioner/A-3 AND 1. The State of Telangana, Represented by Public Prosecutor High Court for the 1 State ofTelangana Hyderabad '.Respondent' . 49 Yrs., Occ . Pvt. Employee Rl/o. 2. Smt.P. Sangeetha, Wio. A. Bethaih, Aged Plot l..lo. 772-8, Phase-l Allwyn Colony, Kukatpally, Hyd.72 ...RespondenUGompiainant Petition under secticn 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 FIR No.704/2026 dated 1Sth July, 2026 on the file of the SHO, Alwal Police Station, l,ledchal-t\4alkajgiri, registered u/ s. 85 BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prchibition Act. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under section 528 of BNSs praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grouncs of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including the arrest of the petitioners in FIR NO. 70412026 dated 15th July,2026 on the fite of the SHO, Alwal police Station, Medchal-Malkajgiri pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. G V S Nagesh, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional public prosecutor on behalf ofthe Respondent No.1 and of None appeared forthe Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER t-- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.12578 of 2026 Date:05.08.2026 Between: A. Laxmi and another ...Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 AND The State of Telangana and alother. ..Respondents Order:

This Criminal Petition has been fiIed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (for short "the BNSS') by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.704 of 2026 of A1wal Police Station, Medchal-Malkajgiri, registered for tl.e offence punishable under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha,2023 (for short 'the BNSJ and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short DP Act'). 2. Heard Mr. G.V.S.Nagesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.1. ) -- 3. With their consent, the criminal petition is disposed of at the stage of admission

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed the alleged offences and have been fatsely implicated in the present case only on the ground that petitioners are the mother and sister of accused No.1. Respondent No.2 voluntarillr left the matrimonial house of accused No. 1 . At no point of time, the petitioners have harassed or abused respondent 1No.2 for additional dowry. He further submitted that accused No. filed F.C.O.P.No 309 of 2026 before the Additional District Judge-cum Famrly Court, Ranga Reddy District, at Kukatpally, seeking restitution of conjugal rights. After receiving the summons in the said case, respondent No.2 hled the present complaint by making omnlbus allegations. Hence the continuation of proceedings against the petitroners is a clear abuse of process of law. He further submitted that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. The Investigating Officer, without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhrta, 2023 (for short 'BNSS) and without following the gnidelines formulated by the Hon'bie Supreme Court in Arnesh E7 3 Kumar Vs. S:tate o:f Blhor', is proceeding further in the matter and the same is contrary to law.

learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted 5. Per contra, in the complaint about that there are specific allegations levelled the harassment made by the petitioners against respondent No'2' Whether the allegations levelled against the petitioners are true or not, the same has to be revealed during the course of investigation quashment of and the petitioners are not entitled to seek proceedings against them at threshold, especially when the since investigation is under progress' He further submitted that' the offences leveled against petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven yea-rs, the Investigating Officer w.ill foliow the due procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and also the guidelines formulated by the Apex Court (suPra). ir Arnesh Kumar by the considere d the rival submissions made 6. Having 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' Even according to the iearned Additionat Public Prosecutor' the I ; \2014) 8 scc 273 4 Investigating Officer wants to follow the due procedure AS contemplated under the provisions of the 35(3) of the BNSS.

7 . In view of the same, the Investigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the BNSS, and a-1so the guidelines formulated by the Hon,ble Apex Court in Anresh Kumar lsupral in respect of petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 and the petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation. It is needless to mention that the petitioners are entitled to submit reply to the notice under Section 3S(3) of the BNSS by raising all the pleas which are available to them and they are also entitled to submit the documents, if any, which are in their custody, to the Investigating Officer. 8 Accordingly, the Criminal petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed Sd/- B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 The X Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Medchal Court, Medchal IVlalkjgiri District. 2 The Station House Officer, Alwal Police Station, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. 3 Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad (OUT) 4. One CC to Mr. G V S Nagesh, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies DLlVH HIGH COURT DATED: 0510812026 1t\r-:t"A t e vORDER )o AUE 2o2E L, 1 3 (il5 CRLP.No.12578 of 2026 * * 0t:.SPAI CRIMINAL PETITON IS DISPOSED OF yL