logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 APHC 021 print Preview print Next print
Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Case No : Criminal Petition No. 13413 of 2025
Judges: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Parties : Murali Krishna Srimath Tirumala Purigella Alias Purigalla Versus The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Through SHO, Kotananduru Police Station, Rep By Its Public Prosecutor,High Court, Amaravathi & Another
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: C. Dhanunjaya, Advocate. For the Respondents: Public Prosecutor.
Date of Judgment : 30-12-2025
Head Note :-
BNSS - Section 528 -
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 528 of the BNSS
- Sections 326(a), 326(b) and 326(c) of BNS
- Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

2. Catch Words:
- Quash
- Investigation
- Coercive action

3. Summary:
The petitioner filed a criminal petition under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash proceedings in Crime No. 225 of 2025, relating to offences under Sections 326(a), (b) and (c) of BNS. Counsel for the petitioner invoked the Supreme Court guidelines in *Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar*. The State’s counsel noted the offences carried imprisonment of less than seven years and sought direction to the police. The Court allowed the investigating officer to continue the investigation and directed police to follow the procedure under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the *Arnesh Kumar* guidelines before taking any coercive action. The Court further held that the petitioner may challenge any charge‑sheet filed. The petition was consequently disposed of, and any pending applications were closed.

4. Conclusion:
Petition Dismissed
Judgment :-

1. The instant Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, by the Petitioner/Accused, to quash the proceedings in Crime No.225 of 2025 of Kotananduru Police Station, Kakinada District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 326(a), 326(b) and 326(c) of BNS.

2. Heard Sri Dhananjaaya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition may be disposed of by giving protection to the petitioner vide guidelines of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar((2014) 8 SCC 273).

4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the offences registered against the petitioner are punishable with less than seven years period of imprisonment and necessary direction may be given to the concerned Station House Officer.

5. Considering the submissions, this criminal petition is disposed of with the following;

                  a. Investigating Officer is at liberty to complete the investigation, in accordance with law.

                  b. In the event of any coercive action sought to be taken against the petitioner, concerned police authorities are directed to scrupulously follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar’s case (supra).

6. It goes without saying that, if any charge sheet is filed in the above crime, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the charge sheet, if he feels aggrieved by the same.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

                  Pending applications, if any, shall stands closed.
 
  CDJLawJournal