APHC010530942025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10315/2025 Between: 1. SRI GEDDAM RAMESH BABU @ RAMESH, S/O GEDDAM DASU, AGED 26 YRS FVAT GOPALAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Through the S.H.O., of Tuni (Rural) P.S.,KakinadaRep., by its Public ProsecutorHigh Court at Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. R SIVA SAI SWARUP Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following 2 ORDER: This criminal petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'the B.N.S.S.'), by the petitioner- accused No. 1 for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 228 of 2025 of Tuni Rural Police Station, Kakinada District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 316 (1), 115 (2), 75 (1) and 351 (2) read with Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'the B.N.S.'), and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No. 1 and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. 3. The petitioner-accused No. 1 is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 85, 316 (1), 115 (2), 75 (1) and 351 (2) read with Section 3 (5) of 'the B.N.S.' and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner is husband of de facto complainant. In the complaint lodged by de facto complainant, there is no reference about date and time of the alleged offences. Learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No. 1 submits that the other accused filed Criminal Petition Nos. 10353 and 10363 of 2025, in which this Court directed the investigating officer to follow Section 35 (3) of 'the B.N.S.S.' since all the offences are punishable below seven years. 4. In Shivangi Bansal v. Sahib Bansal1, the Hon'ble Apex Court in para No. 26 observed that the guidelines framed by the High Court of Allahabad in the judgment dated 13-06-2022 in Criminal Revision No. 1126 of 2022 vide 1 Transfer Petition (C) No. 2367 of 2023 3 para Nos. 32 to 38, with regard to 'Constitution of Family Welfare Committees' for safeguards regarding misuse of Section 498-A IPC, shall remain in effect and be implemented by the appropriate authorities. It appears that Family Welfare Committees have not been constituted so far. 5. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar2, wherein detailed guidelines were issued at Para Nos.11 and 12, for arresting a person, which are being reproduced herein below: 11.Our endeavor in this judgment is to ensure that police officers do not arrest accused unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorize detention casually and mechanically. In order to ensure what we have observed above, we give the following direction: a).All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.’); b)All police officers be provided with a check list containing specified sub- clauses under Section 41(1)(b)(ii); c) The police officer shall forward the check list duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention; d) The Magistrate while authorizing detention of the accused shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorize detention; e) The decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing; f) Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41-A of Cr.P.C be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing; g) Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, he shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before High Court having territorial jurisdiction. h) Authorizing detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court. 2(2014) 8 SCC 273 4 12.We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years; whether with or without fine. 6. The similar view is also reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Md. Asfak Alam v. State of Jharkhand3, which also reiterated the guidelines laid down in the case of Arnesh Kumar. 7. In the light of the law laid down in the cases of Arnesh Kumar and Md. Asfak Alam, the investigating officer is under legal obligation to proceed in accordance with law but he shall follow the procedure prescribed under Sections 41 and 41 (A) of ‘the Cr.P.C.’ (now Sections 35 and 35 (3) of ‘the B.N.S.S.'). The petitioner shall oblige to render his fullest cooperation in the ongoing investigation. 8. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of directing the Investigating Officer to comply with Section 35 (3) of ‘the BNSS’/41-A of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ and to strictly follow the directions issued in the cases of Arnesh Kumar and MD. Asfak Alam. _______________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J. Date: 17.10.2025 Note: The Registrar General is required to expedite the process of 'Constitution of Family Welfare Committees', if not already constituted, as early as possible. B/O JSK 3(2023) 8 SCC 632 5 THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 10315 OF 2025 Date: 17.10.2025 JSK