The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition.Jhe High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 1384 of il24 On the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class Zaheerabad of Sanga Reddy Diskict. l.A. NO: 2OF 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 including appearance of the ------ Petitioners/Accused No 1 to 4 in C.C.No. 1384 of 2024 On the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Zaheerabad of Sanga Reddy District. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Somavarapu Satyanarayana ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, the Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana on behalf of the Respondent No 1. The Court made the following: ORDER ) -tt' i J THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVIEADA CRIMI P lTto No.8829 of 2025 ORDER: This Criminal petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS, 2023,) seeking to quash the proceedings in CC No.1 384 ot 2024 on the.Jile of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Zaheerabad, Ranga Reddy District, registered for the offences under Section 420 lpc and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act,'l 955.

2. Heard Sri Somavarapu Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1_State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits ttpt the specific allegation against the petitioners is that they have procured pDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to seil the same for profit and on 22.01 .2024 at about 12.30 hrs, the petitioners were found in possession of 105 qunitals of pDS rice. ?

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary, alleging that ihe rice was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent and \_ !-.,] I 2 charging the petitioners for prcsecution is untenable and improper. The allegations on their face value cannot be sustained against the petitioners. Further, this Court in Crl.p.Nos.5709 o,f 2019 and 33493 of 2015 while considering the same situation, categorically observed that the offences alleged against the petitioners therein cannot be continued and quashed the proceedings. The.petitioners are also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

5. The learned Additional public prosecutor submits that as per prosecution, the offence said to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Sectians 7 and g of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and requested to pass appropriate orders.

6. Perused the material available on record. a

7. Sections 7 and 8 of the Essential Commodities Act contemplate that any person contravenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential commodities or abetment in this regard, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioners have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer 3 ETO) Crl.P.No.8829_2025 B. A coordinate Bench of this court in crl.p. No.T22l of 2025 has considered the identicar facts and observed that: "There is no averment indicating that the petitioners in any way deceptively induced the beneficiaries to part with the supplied PDS rice or the beneficiary entrusted the pDS rice purchased by them with the petitioners and they dishonesfly misappropriated or converted to their own use or used it in violation of a laMul direction or contract. ln the absence of essential factors, on the face of prosecution, this court finds it to be a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction under section s2g of BNSS, 2023. Thus, continuance of proceedings against the petitioners is abuse of process of law.,, 9- 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 529 of BNSS by applying the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein. .,

10. Accordingly, the criminal petition is altowed and the proceedings in CC No.1384 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judiciat Magistrate of First class, zaheerabad, Ranga Reddy District, against the petitioners, are hereby quashed. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shail stand closed. SD/. M JAWAHAR REDDY T REGISTRAR "_l //TRUE COPYII ECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class Zaheerabad 2. The Station House officer, Police station Zahirabad rown, sangareddy District. (our)

3. Two ccs to the Public Prosecutor, High court of Telangana, Hyderabad 4. b-* 6C to Sri. Somavarapu Satyanarayana Advocate [OPUC] 5.. Two CD CoPies \cy , i' i! i I i I I ; 1 i i I i I \ \ HIGH COURT DATED:0411112025 ORDER CRLP.No.8829 of 2025 $ > c) a _ rA- :) .) 2 2 ttl0ll ilnt * * PA ) ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION a -dua\&ffw