Congress’s arrest spree meets Section 35(3)
Courts have reportedly insisted on procedure in cases involving BRS-linked people. The political-targeting charge remains an allegation; the paperwork, inconveniently, still matters.
Courts have reportedly insisted that police follow the BNSS arrest procedure.
The Congress government in Telangana has watched several police cases involving BRS-linked people run into the same unglamorous obstacle: procedure.
KTR’s PRO Mahesh Manikya Mudiraj was questioned in the Assembly-gate case, taken to Bolarum in a separate case over alleged obstruction, served a notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and released, according to published reports. The Telangana High Court also reportedly directed police to follow the same procedure in the case involving BRS social-media convenor Manne Krishank. A Nampally court reportedly rejected police remand for BRS MLCs T. Madhusudhan Reddy and N. Naveen Kumar Reddy and released them on personal bonds.
Section 35(3) provides for a notice when police have reasonable grounds to question a person. The BNSS arrest framework also requires police to record why arrest is necessary in offences punishable with up to seven years’ imprisonment. That does not prove the BRS allegation of political targeting. It does show that arrest is not meant to be the opening move simply because a case has been registered.
The Telangana High Court’s actual order, the FIRs and the remand papers were not located in the available research. The Congress government has not publicly answered the wider allegation of selective targeting. For now, the courts appear to be reminding the police that procedure is not decorative.