The High Court · 2025

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri PASHAM t\ilOHlTH, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, the Addl- Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents No.1 and 2 and none appeared for the Respondent No.3- The Court made the following: OROER I i ! I I ! l I F--iry..-= -'-l::1 L . /;-.. i i THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI CRIMINAL PETITION No.42 35 0F 2025 ORDER This Oriminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (tor sho( ,BNSS, 2023') seekirg quashment of the proceedings in Crime No.44 of 2025 of Madanapur Police Station, Wanaparthy Districi, against the petitioner.

2. The p€,titioner is sole accused in Crime No.44 of 2O2S registered f,:r the offences punishable under Sections 316 (2), 316(5), 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 1>_023 (for short 'BNS, 2023') and Section 7 of Essentiat Conrmodities Act,'1955 (for r;hort, 'EC Act'). 3. Heard Mr. Pasham Mohith, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned A,dditional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Nos..l anrJ 2. 4. The prcsecution case in brief is that the petitionr:r is the Proprietor of Rice Mill under the name and stvle ,lr/l/s Venkateshwara Traders' and engaged in the business of milling of paddy. 'Ihe Telangana State Civil Supplies Corporatior Limited .(for short, 'TSOSCL') bntered into agreement with the petitioner,s 2 NTR,J GRLP _4235_2025 firm for procuring and milling of paddy and to deliver back the custom milling rice. Accordingly for the Kharif and Rabi seasons 2022-2023, the paddy of 2111 MT was delivered and on inspection dated2l .03.2025, found that 1125 lvlT of paddy was missing. Thus, a police report was lodged against the petitioner for misappropriation of stocks and violation of the agreement and for recovery of the amounts. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per the agreement the de facto complainant and petitioner would be in joint custody of the paddy. Further pleaded that the Government did not properly store the paddy and for natural reasons some of the quantity was damaged. Howsoever, as per the agreement the dispute has to be placed before the Arbitrator and without such an effort the Government on its own concluding misappropriation and initiating prosecution without t any finding regarding the relevant aspects and the actual loss, based solely on a stock discrepancy and alleging complicity is implausible. That apart, the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation and is intending to see through the process. He further pointed out that the coordinate bench of this Court vide . Criminal Petition Nos. 1 574, 157 5 of 2025, 895 and 12037 of 2024 \ \ , I 3 NTR,J oF.LP _4235_2025 held that the Section 316(5) of BNS, 2023 would not attract in the circumstances of the case and directed the investigating agency for issuance of 35(3) of BNSS, 2023 notice and to f,cllow the guidelines enunciated in Arnesh Kumar v. Sfate of Biharl .Thus pleaded for granting similar relief to meet their hardship. 6. Learne,l Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the investigation is in progress and fairly admits that except for the difference in the stock found on the inspection, the othe. aspects are under investigation and also accepted that this Court in the petition filed l>y the accused with self same allegations including I I I l criminal brear:h of trust had directed the investigating agency to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of BNSS,

2023. 7 . B. Having regard to the nature of the offences and depth of I have Frerused the materials on record. allegations against the petitioner and except the alleged offence under Section 316(5) of BNS, 2023, rest of the accusarions are punishable with the imprisonment of less than seve.r years, without entering into merits and keeping open the prerogatives of ,the investigat ng agency and to maintain parity, directing the ' (2014) 8 SCC 27:l l L ,i 4 NTR.J 0RLP 4235 2025 investing agency for issuance of Section 35(3) of BNSS, 2023 notice on the petitioner and to follow the guidelines of Arnesh Kumar v. Sfafe of Bihal before proceeding against the petitioner is found appropriate. Accordingly ordered. ln unison the petitioner is directed to submit his explanation and shall cooperate with the investigation. 9. With this direction, this Criminal Petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. To, SD/- MOHD ISMAIL ASSISTANT RE STRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER I 2 ., J 4 5 The ludicial First Class Magiskate Atmakur The Station House OfficerfPolice Station, Madanapur' Wanaparthy District Two CCs to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, l{igh Cout at Hyderabad' (OUT) One CC to SRI PASHAM MOHITH , Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies Tpk/PSL '? (2014) 8 scc 273 HIGH COLIRT DATED:271031:2025 I I e q ETFo .$ q s\ tr $ t1 *H o 9 ], t. +'f 4( ORDER GRLP.No.4235 of 2025 CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF E b