Syed Estrteshaniuddin v. The allegations, even taken at his face value cannot be sustained
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
Accordingly, the Climinal Petition is allowed and the
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. The Station House Officer, Kanchanbagh Police Station, Hyderabad 3. Two CCs to The ublic Prosecutor, Telangana High Court, Hyderabad [OUT] 4. One CC to Sri M.W.R. Jayakar, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies SR/GNK HIGH COURT DATED: 06/05/2026 ORDER CRLP.No.7439 ol 2026 \ I…
- Para 44. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without ther& being any complaint from any beneficiary, alleging rhar the rice was procure d deceptively or with a criminal intent and charging the petitioner for prosecution is untenable and improper. The allegations, even taken at…
Judgment
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS.C 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. 3823 of 2023 on the fih of the Vll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad,'to the extent of the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused. l.A. NO: 1OF 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 stay all further proceedings including the personal appearance in C.C. No. 3823 of 2023 on the file of the Vll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad, to the extent of the petitioners, who is arrayed as Accused. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M.W.R. Jayakar, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (IG) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 . The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH CO URT A FOR .t HY TH ERA D E, S'I'A BAD TE OFT ELAN GANA THE HONOURABLE SITI 'IUSTICE J'SRE'ENTVAS RAO TI'tI 39o f2026 ONN o.74 LPE INA CRIM Date: 06.05.2 026. Between: Syed Estrteshaniuddin ...Petitioner ,\NI) l-he State ol Telarrgatla enci aur'rtllc t ...ResPondents ()RDER 'l'his Crirninal i't'-iition has been hted by the petitioner/accused seekitrs to qtrash the proceedings in C.C.No.3823 of 202i' on the trle of leamed VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nan.rpallv' Hyderabad' lileard Mr'M W lt'Ja'rakar' learrred counsel for the petitioner 2. and Mr.Jithendcr Rao Veerarnalla' learned Additional Public Prosecutor for resPondents' 3. The specific allegation against the petitioner/accused is that he has procured PDS rice ttou the benehciaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for protit and on 18 02'2023' the petitioner was found \ 2 in possession of 60 ptastic bags of pDS rice totalling 27.70 quintals.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without ther& being any complaint from any beneficiary, alleging rhar the rice was procure d deceptively or with a criminal intent and charging the petitioner for prosecution is untenable and improper. The allegations, even taken at his face value cannot be sustained against the petitioner. Furthei, 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 petitioner is also entitled to the salne relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings againsl the petitioner.
The learned Additional public prosecutor submits that as per prosecution, the offences said to have been committed by the petitioner is cheating and violation of Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ,EC Act,) and requested to pass appropriate orders.
Section 7 of the EC Act contemplate that any person contravenes with the production; supply, distribution and trade of I 3 essential Commodities, is punishabte. As per the prosecution, the rice ti'om the beneficiaries after petitioner has Procured PDS supply from the dcaler' ta'_ A doordinate Bcnch of this Courr in Crl'P'No'7227 of 2025 7 has considereci the identical tacts and observed that: I I "I'ltere is no (t\)e nctt! inlicctting tlktl lhe Petilioncr tn any way tlet'eptilelv inrlt.rc, etl thc lt tlt'f ic iLtrics lo plrt ||'iIh the :t4lplrcd PD'\ ricc ,,,1 tin tnrrfirirur) etttrttstc'(l thc I'Dii ricc ltrrrchttsed hv them u'ith lhe pelitiotrcr t-uld lhc.\' d;shottcs!b rttitupprr ryr itt!cLl or conterled lo their o*n 11,\e or useLl il iti |iol'iitott of'lt lttr'[Ll tli'ertitttt or co tract. In lhe ubsence oJ esscntidl fttL:tt)i i itri iltL' iitet 'tl putst'ctrlirtrt' lhis Cour-l /i ds llo be a'fit cusc to e\ar( i:' th( iut'i\(li(tit)tt ttntlar Scction 528 o/ BN'SS' 2023. Tius. (onlitllt(ttlLC r'j proctaditgs ug(tinsl the Petilioner is abuse r.tf proce ss tl lott"'. -it
Operative part
The tacts and circumstances of the present case also similar to those in the above case an{l lrencc' this Court linds it to be a f,lt case to exercise jurisdicrion trnrler Section 528 of BNSS by applying the same arlalog,v- and to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein. g. Accordingly, the Climinal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No'3823 of 2023' on the file of leamed VII AdditionalChiefMetropoLitanMagistrateatNampally, Hyderabad, against the petitioner/accused'-are hereby quashed' 4 Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.K BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER To,
TheVll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad.
The Station House Officer, Kanchanbagh Police Station, Hyderabad 3. Two CCs to The ublic Prosecutor, Telangana High Court, Hyderabad [OUT] 4. One CC to Sri M.W.R. Jayakar, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies SR/GNK HIGH COURT DATED: 06/05/2026 ORDER CRLP.No.7439 ol 2026 \ I 16-E SIArf ( 7 6) 5 o,J 1 4 lqI\Y 2[2E t OgSPATC\ * CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED v (m \.-/
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the Climinal Petition is allowed and the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528; Essential Commodities Act, 1955 — s. 7.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Telangana High Court, on 06 May 2026. The bench was R TNE NONOURABLE SRI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.