The High Court · 2025

High Court of police station, ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 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 cc No. 52 Of 2018 on the file the court of Judicial First class Magistrate At Thorrur, Mahabubabad District, against the Petitioners/A.1 to 5. l.A. NO: 2 OF 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 grant stay of all further proceedings against the petitioners/Accused No.1 to 5 in CC No. 52 of 2018 on the file the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate At Thorrur, Mahabubabad District till the disposal of the Main Quash Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Laxmaiah Kanchani, Advocate for the petitioner and sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJT CRIMINAL PETITION No.8 479 0F 202s ORDER This petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS, 2023') seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.340 of 2018 pending on the file of the Judicial First class Magistrate at Thorrur, l\4ahabubabad District against the petitioners/accused Nos.'l to 5.

2. Heard tVlr.Laxmaiah Kanchani, learned counsel for petitioners- accused Nos.1 to 5, Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State

3. The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 5 in C'C'No'340 of 2018 for the offences under Section 420 of lndian Penal Code and Section 7 and 8 of Essential Commodities Act.

4. The specific allegation against the petitioners/accused Nos'1 to 5 that they have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 12.02.2018 at about 12:00 hours' the petitioners were found in possession of 14 bags of PDS rice with 50kgs each.

5.Learnedcounselforthepetitionerswouldsubmitthatwithout there being any complaint from any beneficiary, the rice was procured _) \IIt,JT Cr/.P.No. 8479 aJ 202t deceptively or with a criminal intent, charging the petitioners for prosecution is untenable and improper. The allegations on their face value cannot be sustained against the aileged offences. Fu(her, this court in crl.P.Nos.5709 ot 2019 and 33493 ot 2015 whire considering the'selfsame situation categorically observed that the offences alleged against the petitioner therein cannot be continued and quashed the proceedings. The petitioners arso entiiled to same rerief, hence prayed for quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

6. I have perused the materials on record

7. As per the prosecution, this offence said to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating, criminal breach of trust and violation of Section 7 and 8 of Essential Commodities Act.

8. Section 7 and B of Essentiar commodities Act contemprate that any person contravenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essentiar commodities or abatement in this regard is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioners have procured pDS rice from the beneficiaries after suppry from the dearer. The situation does not amount either intervening with the supply or distribution or trade of the PDS rice, as the materiar rice had reached the beneficiary.

9. That apart, there is no averment indicating that the petitioner in any way deceptivery induced the beneficiaries to part with the suppried )J i\"]-lt,Jr Cr/.P.Na 8179 of 2025 PDS rice or and beneficiary entrusted the PDS rice purchased by him with the petitioners and he dishonestly misappropriated or converted their own use or used it in violation of a lawful direction or contract. ln the absence of essential factors, on the face of prosecution this Court finds it fit case to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS' Further, this court in crl.P.No.13758 oI 2018 a coordinate bench of this Court has considered identical case facts and drawn similar conclusions. Thus, continuance of proceedings against the petitioners is found abuse of process.

10. For the aforesaid, this petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 5 in C.C'No.340 of 2018 pending on the file of the Judicial First Class fi/agistrate at Thorrur, lvlahabubabad District against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5, are hereby quashed. lVliscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/. N. SRIHARI DEPUTY REGISTRAR l Note: This Order is amended as Per ii're iou.t order dated 18.08'2025 in l'A' Ho. S ot 2025 Crl.P. No' 8479 ot 2025 Lv'irJpt"nting C.C. No. 52 of 2018 '-'- -ttris Amended Order w-ith C.C. No. 340 of 2018. substitutes the earlier order d ispatched on 23.07 -2025 Sd/- N. SRIHARI PUTY REGISTRAR D //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, The Judicial First Class Magistrate At Thorrur' Mah a ubabad District 1 -l "

2. The Station House 3 l;; ee;i; iffi;f:"ElJ::ffi ';i;T B:Tlel , Hyderabad IOUTI 4. One CC to Sri Laim r,t^ iil ;; f"; i:.t"'a ia h Ka n cha n i' Advoca te to P u c J --'- I rvrs(/utul' Hlgn L;ourt for the State of Telangana at Mahabubabad d I I { I i) t' J ) 15 sEP 206 .) \ t- \r t, .4. ti / -4 Fa r H.: HIGH COURT DATED: 0910712025 18t08t2025 AMENDED ORDER CRLP.No.8479 ot 2025 ALLOWING THE CRL.P q ,r{