The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.3083 ot 2022 on the file of the Honble Xl Spl. Magistrate of First Class under PCR Act cum ll Addl Junior Civil Judge, Hanamkonda against the Petitioner/Accused. l.A. NO: 2OF 2025 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P .C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay all further proceedings in C.C.No.3083 of 2022 on the file of the Honble Xl Spl. Magistrate of First Class under PCR Act cum ll Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Hanamkonda, pending disposal of the above marn Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Abdul Azam Khan, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of None appeared for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI c RIMINAL PETITION No.3483 ot 2025 ORDER This petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashment of 'the proceedings in C.C.No.30B3 ot 2022 on the file of Xl Special Magistrate of First Class under PCR Act-cum-ll Additional Junior Civil Judge, Hanamkonda, against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2.

2. Heard [\r1r Abdul Azam Khan, learned counsel for petitioners and tVlr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

3. The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No.30B3 of 2022 for the offence under Section 420 of lPC. 4. Prosecution case in brief is that, on 20.05.2021 the respondent No.2/de facfo complainant along with staff surprised the premises of Ra1 ENT hospital, Laxmipuram, Hanamkonda and their enquiries revealed that the Managing Director of the hospital is retailing the Remdesivir injection for Rs,30,000/- to Rs.35,000/- basing on the condition of the patients and from the medical shop, (15) Remdesivir injections with printed MRP at Rs.3,490/- have been seized. Thus, alleging that with an intention to illegal gain, the l"tpetitioner as Managing Director is selling the injection at higher 2 prices lodged the report. Whereupon, a case in Crime No.243 of 2021 was registered under Section 420 of lndian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'lPC'), Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'EC Act') and Section 5'1 of the National Disaster lVlanagement Act, 2005 (for short'DM Act'). After investigation, charge sheet has been filed and the Court has taken cognizance for the offence under Section 420 of lPC. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the offence in the complaint is baseless. Even if the allegations are believed as they are, does not constituting any offence within the meaning of cheating defined under Section 415 of lPC. That apart, investigating agency has not considered the fact that petitioner No.1 is only practicing Doctor and the petitioner No.2 is an Employee in Pharmacy and the hospital is run by the third party. He further pleads that at any stretch, there is nothing to disclose that the petitioners committed cheating in trading of Remdesivir injections at higher price and in absence of any material evidence proving the ingredients of cheating, the proceedings in Calendar Case would be abuse of process and liable to be quashed. Further by placing reliance on the judgment dated 24.11.2023 passed by a co-ordinate bench in Crl.P.No.5562 of 2023 pleaded that in that case, considering similar allegations made against the petitioners/accused 3 therein, by noting statutory and settled legal positions held that the allegations does not qualify the alleged crime under Sections 420, 1BB r/w. 34 of IPC and Section 51-B of the DM Act and acquitted them. He asserted that the petitioners herein stand in the same position, hence prayed for quashment of the proceedings. 6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would fairly admit that this Court, in Crl.P.No.5562 of 2023 had considered relatable accusations against the accused therein and held that Section 420 of IPC cannot be applied to the facts and circumstances and this proposition is applicable on all fours to the present case. 7. 8. As per the charge sheet, the witnesses LWs.1 to 3 are the I have perused the materials on record. Police Constables, who are part of the team surprised the premises on relevant day and their evidence is in line with the evidence of LWllde facto complainant and the statement in the police report. The other witnesses referred to is the LW.4, who said to have made statement that he has paid Rs.35,000/- for the injection and also agreed to pay 34,000/- for the injection to be administered on his brother. These statements are demonstrating that the core of the accusations is sale of Remdesivir injection beyond lVaximum Retail Price displayed on the injection. l 4

9. ln this position the pertinent question that arise for consideration is whether sale of the injection beyond Maximum Retail Price would amount to cheating? 1 0. The offence of cheating is defined in Section 415 of IPC which reads as follows Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or properly, ls sard to "cheat".

11. Thus, to constitute an offence of cheating, there shall be fraudulent or dis-honest inducement and the persons so deceived has to delivered any property and such an act should have caused harm to the person so induce in body, mind, reputation or property.

12. ln the instant case, even as per the statement of the witnesses, the specific names of the petitioners and their overt act in commission of offence are conspicuously missing. Further, the charge sheet is not Cisclosing as to collection of any material reflecting the petitioners involvement in dis-honest inducement or deceptive act in trading the injection at higher price. Notably, there 5 t is no material on record evidencing the roles of the petitioners in the hospital. '13. The statement of LW.4 is evidencing that the Management asked Rs.35,0001 for administering the injection for the treatment. This direct demand is not making out any -deceptive act or inducement on the witness to purchase the injection at Rs.35,000/- or Rs.34,000/-. That apart, no circumstance is found to atleast infer that, if the LW.4 was not under such inducement or deception would not have bought the injection at that price. Thus it is patent that, even after investigation the prosecution could not secure any legally acceptable material to show that the petitioners had committed an actwithin the scope of Section 415 of lPC. For these reasons, this Court finds that at any stretch the material placed on record is making out an act of the within the scope of offence under Section 420 of lPC.

14. Further, the coordinate bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.5562 of 2023, considering the similar circumstances held that the prosecution under Section 420 of IPC canriot be sustained and quashed the proceedings against the petitioners therein.

15. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of Calendar Case proceedings against the 6 petitioners for the offence under Section 42O of IPC would be abuse of process of law.

16. Resultantly, this Criminal Petition is allowed and Calendar Case proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No.3083 of 2022 on the file of Xl Speciql Magistrate of First Class under PCR Act-cum-ll Additional Junior Civil Judge, Hanamkonda, are hereby quashed. t\/iscellaneo-us petitions, pellding if any, shdl s-tand closed SD/. MOHD. MAIL ASSISTANT REGI TRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Xl Special Magistrate of First class under PCR Act cum llAdditional Junior Civil Judge, Hanamkonda

2. The Station House Officer, Hanamkonda Police Station, warangal District 3'TwoCCstoPublicProsecutor,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hyderabad. (OUT)

4. One CC to Srr Abdul Azam Khan' Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD CoPtes DL/PSL \L HIGH COURT DATED:1210312025 ORDER CRLP.No.3483 ol 2025 $E STAI e' k :) L) 02 I\ R 2025 * ji:s > oi. -c- * ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION I coP(aL v,_ fq{'"