The High Court · 2025

l\4ancherial District, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

2. A.Madhusudhan Rao, Sub-lnspector of Police,, Jannaram Police Station, Mancherial District ...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS 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 Charge Sheet in C.C. No. 230 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil J udge-cum-J udicial [\/agistrate of First Class at Luxettipet, Ivlancherial District against the Petitioner/Accused No-7. 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 stay of all further proceedings against Petitioner/Accused No.7 pursuant to C.C.No.230 of 2022 on the file of Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Luxettipet, Mancherial District, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri ARVAPALLI SHIVA SAI NATH, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON,BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA TII :VI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1 3363 of 2(t5 ORDER: 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Sectior 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') ; :eking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No , in C.C.No.230 of 2022, pending on the file of the learned Junior I ivil Judge-cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Luxettipet, M; r cherial District, registered for the alleged offence punishable under S ection 34 (e) of the Telangana Exctse Act, 1968 (for short 'the Act').

2. Heard Sri A.Shiva Sainath, learned counsel i r the petitioner as well as Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, the le;t ned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1 - Itate.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted ti lt the matter is squarely covered by the order dated 04.03.2022 in lrl.P,No.15636 oI 2013 and enclosed a copy of the said order.

4. Learned Additional Public prosecutor also sut nitted that the issue in the present criminal petition is squarely c rvered by the earlier order in the above criminal petition. I- 2 E]'D, J Crlp _13363 2025 l

5. Perused the record. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was found in possession of Jaggery. lt is alleged that the said Jaggery is used as a material in preparation of lD liquor and that the petitioner had been selling it to earn good returns as it is used in the manufacture of such liquor. An FIR has been registered under Section 34 (e) of the Act, which prescribes penalties for the illegal import, export, etc., of prohibited materials mentioned therein without any license or permit. Specifically, Section 34(e) of the Excise Act penalizes the use and possession of any materials, stills, utensils, implements, or apparatus whatsoever for the purpose of manufacturing any intoxicant other than toddy.

6. The material alleged to have been seized herein is Jaggery. lt is pertinent to refer Section 2 (22A) of Excise Act which reads as under: "Material' includes molasses, wash and such other substances as the State Government may, by notifi cation, specify";

7. Further, proceedings were issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in Memo No.47802lEx.lll.112006-13, dated

20.12.2010 and the contents of the said memo are extracted below: 3 ETD, J Crlp_.13363 202s "The attention of the Commissioner of Prohit) Excise, A.P., Hyderabad is invrted b the refer cited, wherein he has senf proposal for ino Rotten Jaggery under definition of materie t Excise Act, 7968 so as fo ensure effective ; lD arrack crime and to improve Gol Revenue. 2. Government after careful examinatiort matter, hereby decided that Black Jaggery ,'t Jaggery or any other form of Jaggery are vit agriculture produce or its bi-products and inct the same in the list of the 'materials' use r manufacture of lD liquor may adversely el interest of genuine ryots and the traders. ;, was decided not to impose restriction agriculture produce, particularly on Jaggery. 'ion and ,nce 7sl tsion of in A.P. ntrol of )rnment of the Rotten wed as rsion of in the ect the )nce, it tn any

3. Hence, the proposal to include rotten jagget r under definition of 'material' u/s. 2 ctf A.P. Excise a, t, 1968 has not been accepted by the Government. ' B. Thus, a conjoint reading of Section 34(e) of re Act, the definition of "material" under Section 2(22A) of the I ct, and the recitals of the Government Memo dated20.12.2010 w >uld lead to the conclusion that black jaggery is not a material as )numerated under Section 2(22A) of the Act. Hence, it cannot be t eld that the petitioners have committed an offence as laid j twn under Section 34(e) of the said Act.

9. Similar matters have been disposed of by a )o-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.15636 of 2013, u herein the proceedings against the petitioner therein were qua:;l ed holding 4 - ETD, J Crlp 13363_2025 that taking cognizance for possession of black jaggery would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Applying the same analogy, this Court is also of the considered opinion that continuation of proceedings against the petitioner herein would amount to an abuse of process of law.

10. ln view of the foregoing discussion, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.7 in C.C.No.230 o'f 2022, pending on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Luxettipet, IMancherial District, are hereby quashed.

11. [Vliscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. A JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial lVlagistrate of First Class at Luxettipet, Mancherial District,

2. The Station House Officer, Police Station, Jannaram, Mancherial District 3. Two CCs to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court at Hyderabad. (OUT) 4. One CC to SRI ARVAPALLI SHIVA SAI NATH Advocate IOPUC] 5. Two CD Copies ABK o HIGH COURT DATED: 1511012025 j t -a, . : .: :, fA f(-'

1..'.:. (),,. 'r I Er:[ ffi a. l ai! . --,.,11'',i'1', '. ---.---:=->'' ORDER CRLP.No.13363 of 2025 CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED