Telangana High Court
Lingampalli Devender Rao vs The State Of Telangana on 22 July, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.2806 OF 2025
ORDER
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'the BNSS') seeking quashment of the proceedings in Crime No.750 of 2024 on the file of the Karimnagar II Town Police Station, Karimnagar District, against the petitioner.
2. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.3 in Crime No.750 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 290, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPC'); Section 5 of the Chit Fund Act, 1982 (for short, 'the Act') and Section 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositor's of Financial Establishment Act, 1999 (for short, 'the TSPDFEA').
3. Heard Mr.N.Amarnath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State as well as Mr.P.Devender, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
4. The brief facts of the case are that on 25.05.2023, at 14:00 hours, the de-facto complainant/respondent No.2 lodged a complaint 2 EVV,J Crl.P. No.2806 of 2025 stating that accused Nos.1 to 3 cheated respondent No.2 by avoiding to pay the chit amount of Rs.8,85,300/- even after completion of payment of chit instalments. It is stated that when respondent No.2 asked about the chit amount, accused No.4 besides abusing him in filthy language, also threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, they have committed the offences punishable under Sections 420, 290, 506 of the IPC; Section 5 of the Act and Section 5 of the TSPDFEA.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire allegations levelled against the petitioner do not constitute the offences punishable under Sections 420, 290, 506 of the IPC; Section 5 of the Act and Section 5 of the TSPDFEA, as the petitioner is the practicing advocate and he is only appearing on behalf of M/s.Kanakadurga Chit Fund Private Limited, in the capacity of Standing Counsel, without indulging in the internal affairs of the said chit fund company. Therefore, subjecting the petitioner to undergo investigation would amount to abuse of process of law. He further submitted that the petitioner is apprehending coercive steps in the hands of respondent No.1-Police under the guise of investigation. He also submitted that the petitioner has no intention 3 EVV,J Crl.P. No.2806 of 2025 of evading the investigation and is willing to extend full cooperation to the authorities.
6. Opposing the same, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that respondent No.1-Police concerned are consistently requesting the petitioner to appear before respondent No.1-Police to cause service of notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS as the imprisonment for the alleged offences is below seven (07) years except Section 5 of the TSPDFEA, but the petitioner/accused No.3 has been avoiding to cooperate with the investigation. He further submitted that the complaint has been registered before respondent No.1-Police and it is the bounden duty to conduct investigation in accordance with law, however, the petitioner is not available for personal service of notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.
7. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted the petitioner along with other accused evaded paying chit amount to respondent No.2. He further submitted that the petitioner is the director of M/s.Kanakadurga Ventures and Projects Private Limited which is sister concern of M/s.Kanakadurga Chit Fund Private Limited. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition 4 EVV,J Crl.P. No.2806 of 2025
8. Perused the materials on record.
9. Considering the submissions made by both the parties, it is noteworthy that the offences punishable under Section 5 of the TSPDFEA is not applicable to the petitioner as there is no documentary evidence is adduced to prove that the petitioner is director of the said chit fund company. Since the alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment for a term less than seven (07) years except Section 5 of the TSPDFEA, and in view of the willingness of the petitioner to cooperate with investigation, without going into merits and demerits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner/accused No.3 to appear before the Station House Officer (SHO), Karimnagar II Town Police Station on or before 05.08.2025 between 11:00 a.m. and 05:00 p.m. Upon such appearance, the Investigating Officer shall issue notice to the petitioner under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, in connection with Crime No.750 of 2024, and shall proceed further strictly in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar 1. Simultaneously, the petitioner is directed to extend full cooperation to the Investigating Officer during the 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273 5 EVV,J Crl.P. No.2806 of 2025 course of the investigation. The petitioner/ accused No.3 is directed to co-operate with the investigating officer by filing reply/explanation to the notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS within two (02) weeks thereafter and to produce any relevant documents/material papers in defence if any in concluding the investigation. Further, the Investigating Officer is directed not to render any coercive steps including the arrest against the petitioner/accused No.3. The Investigating Officer is also directed to conduct and conclude the investigation as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) months from today in accordance with law.
10. With the above directions, this Criminal Petition is disposed of.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________________ JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL Date: 22.07.2025 gms