Bukya Narender Nayak & Anr. v. The State ofTelangana & Anr.

State of Telangana, Rep. By its Public Prosecutor High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad

Sri.A Narsinga Rao, Sub-lnspector of Police,, Medipally PS, Malkajgiri District ...RESPONDENTS/COM PLAINANT 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 OUASH the proceedings in Crime. No. 606 of 2026 On the file of PS Medipally, District Medchal Malkajgiri, against the petitioners/ accused and to pass such other order or order l.A. NO: 2OF 2026 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 grant STAY of all further proceedings in Crime. No. 606 of 2026 On the file of PS Medipally, District Medchal Malkajgiri, pending disposal of the above criminal petition, and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri C.Vivekanand' Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Addl Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents No.1 and none appears for Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER (t TN THE IIIGH COURT FO R TTIE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRJMINAL PETITION No.6924 of2026 Date: 01.05.2026 Between: Bukya Narender Nayak and another AND ..Petitioners The State of Telangana, and another ...Respondents ORDER This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.606 of 2026 of Medipally Police Station, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.l and 2, for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha,2023 (for short ,BNS,) and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'EC Act').

2. Heard Mr.C.Vivekanand, leamed counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional public Prosecutor for respondents 2 (-

The specific allegation against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 is that they have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 22.04.2026, the petitioners were found in possession of 3.5 tonnes of PDS rice.

Leamed counsel for the petitioners would submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary, alleging that the rice was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent and charging the petitioners for prosecution is untenable and improper. The allegations, even taken at their face value cannot be sustained against the petitioners. Further, this Court, in Crl.P.No.5709 of 2019, while considering the same situation, categorically observed that the offences alleged against the petitioners therein could not be continued and accordingly quashed the proceedings. The petitioners are also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

The leamed Additional Public Prosecutor submits that as per prosecution, the offences said to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'EC Act') and requested to pass appropriate order[.- :,.EF_6

Section 7 of the EC Act contemplate that any person contravenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential commodities, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioners have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer.

A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.7227 of 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that "Thare is no ayerment indicating that the petitioner in any way deccptively induce-d the benertciqries lo part with the supplied pDS ricc or the benejicia4' entntsted the PDS rice purchosed by then with the pelitioner and thtry dishonestly misappropridted or converted to their ou'n use or used it in violation of a lawful direction or conlract. ln the absence of essential .factors, on the face of prosecution, this Courtfinds it to be a jit case ro exeruse the jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. Thus, continuance ofproceedings againsl the petitioner is abuse ofprocess of low".

The facts and circumstances of the present case also similar to those in the above case and hence, this Court finds it to be a fit case to exercise jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS by applying the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. 9 Accordingly, the Criminal Petition' is allowed and the proceedings in FIR No.606 of 2026 of Medipally police Station, Medchal-Malkaj giri District, against the petitioners/accused Nos. I 4 6 and 2, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. To, SD/- AHMEDABDULLAKHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER