Uday Kumar Appam, v. The State of Telangana,
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-04-13. Uday Kumar Appam, v. The State of Telangana,. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[ 3303 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD a MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETI TloN NO: 5427 OF 2026 Between: years, Occ Private Uday Kumar Appam, S/o Satyanaray*na, aged about 32 Khaiaguda' Employee, R/o Flat No. 4'10, LIG 24' Block, Chitrapuri Colony, Hyderabad. Aged about 47 years' Occ I Vijayalakshmi Appam, Wo Satyanarayana, Ramannapet Mandat, Yadadri- Housewife, Rlo U. No. A-t+S, Yellanki Village' Bhongiri District 'l ... Petitioners/Accused & 2 AND 1 The State of Telangana,, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, Through WPS West Zone (Hyderabad) Police Station, High Court of Telangana State, Hyderabad. 2 Smt- Kongari Swetha,, Wo Appam LJ{ay Kumar' aged about 31 years, Occ' Doctor, RJo H. No. B-3-228l366/ 1, Rahmath Nagar, Yousufguda, Borabanda' Hyderabad Diskict. ... RespondenUDe-facto Complainant Petition under Section 482 of Cr. P. C or under section 528 of B.
N S S' of praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased topleased to quash the Proceedings ln F. t. R. No. 43 of 2026 on the file of the wPS west Zone (Hyderabad), d1. 30. 03. 2026 in the interest of justice. r l. A. NO: 2 OF 2026 Petition under Section 482 of Cr-P. C or under section 52t of B. N. S S praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounc t of Criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of all further Procer cings in F. l. R,No. 43 of 2026 on the file of the WPS West Zone (Hyderabad), dt ]0. 03. 2026 pending disposal of the main petition This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing t e Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments c Ms. Satya Gayathri, counsel representing sri Rapolu Bhaskar, Advocate for thr: Petitioners and sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behz f of the Respondent No.
1 and none appeared for Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDBRABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 5427 of 2026 Date:13. 04. 2026 Betu,'een: Uday Kumar Appam and another ... Petitioners/ Accused Nos. 1 and 2 AND The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, Through WPS West Zone (Hyderabad) Police Station, High Court ofTelangana State, Hyderabad and another. ... Respondents Order: This Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (for short 'the BNSSJ by the peti tioners / accused Nos. l and 2 seeking to quash the proceedings in F. l. R. No. 43 of 2026 ot WPS West Zone (Hyderabad) Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 316(2) and 351 (2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'the BNS') and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of lhe Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (tor short'DP ActJ. 2. Heard Ms.
Satya Gayathri, learned counsel representing Mr. Rapolu Bhaskar, Iearned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Ad: tional public Prosecutor, appearing for rcspondent No. l 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners subn) tred that the petitioners have not committed any offences and t r':y have been falsely implicated rn the present crime. Re; r,tndent No. 2 voluntarily left the matrimonial home of petitione . accused No. l and filed the present complaint by making omni: _rs allegations against the petitioners. Even according to the allege _ions made tn the complaint, the ingredients for the offences und: . Sections g5, 316(2) and 351 (2) of rhe BNS and Secrions 3, 4 a^t I 6 of the Dp Act are not attracred against the petitioners. The cr t. nces leveled against the petitioners are punishabte with impris r rrmenl up to seven years.
However, the Investigating Officer, will cut following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section ,35(3) of the BNSS, the guiderines issued by the Apex court in r. r nesh Kumar Vs. State of Biharr, the principles laid down by the jontrle Apex Court in Md. Asfak Alam v, The State of Jharkha n C & another (crl A. No. 2207 of 20231 dated 31. 07. 2o23, and ars r he circular issued by this Court in ROC. No. t3gglSO/2023 dare : Og. Oa. 2O23, is proceeding with the investigation, which is cor l . ,ry to law. 8 SCC '(20I4) 273 Hence, the conLinuation of proceedings against the petitioners is a clear abuse of process of law. 4. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, basing upon the written instructions dated i0. O4. 2026 furnished by the Sub-lnspector of Police, WPS Jubilee Hills Zone, Hyderabad, submilted that the Investigating Ofhcer issued notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to pe titioncrs / accused Nos. 1 and 2 on O1. O4.
2026 and they are entitled to submit their reply to the said notice by raising pleas available to them. Petitioners/ accused Nos. 1 and 2, without submitting their reply to the said notice, have straight awa,\' approached this Court and filed the present Criminal Petition. Moreover, there are specific allegations leveled against the pe[itioners. Whether the petitioners have committed the offence or no! , has to bc rcvcaled during the course of investigation, especially u'hen the investigation is under progress. 5. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal o[ the material available on record, it reveals that the olfences leveled against I petitioners/accused Nos. l and 2 are punishable with I imprisonment of less than seven years. Even according to the t learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the Investigating Olficer has I alread-v issued no[rce under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to petitioners/accused Nos. I and 2 on 01. 04. 2026.
n view of the same, petitioners / accused Nos. 1 and 2 are entitlerl r submit their reply by raising all the pleas u'hich are available to trem and they are also entitled to submit the documents, whir, are in their custody. The Investigating Officer is lurthe - directed to scrupulously follow the procedure as contempla t :,1 under the provisions of the BNSS and the guidelines laid dowr ry lhe Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Runtar supra and :'rnclude the investigation. 6. Subject to the above directions, the Crimrr aLl Petition is disposed of Miscellaneous applications, pending if an.. shall stand closed. SD/. I:. BHAVANI SWAMY ASSI ;TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \ sEcTloN oFFlcER { To, rlyderabad. 1. The Xlll Additional Chief Judicial Magiskate, at Nampally 2. The Station House Officer WPS West Zone (Hyderabarl Police Station, High Court of Telangana State, Hyderabad. 3. One CC to Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, Advocate [OPUC] 4.
Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for the lState of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies Ba/PS L HIGH COURT DATED: 1310412026 i 'rQp 1r ES l oR ( ORDER C (J 1 7 lPF 2tr]s : CRLP. No. 5427 of 2026 . *i . S ,. / ,{- ' - -l I I DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITIO N q \lh
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.