The High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana, Rep.by its Public Prosecutor High Court at Hyderabad. ... 1't RespondenUstate

2. P.Rarnulu, Son of Not Known, Age. 50 Years, Occ. Asst.Sub- lnspector of Policer (A.S.l) Circle R/o Gandi Maisamma, Dundigal, Damara Pochampally, Medchal Malkajgiri Dist ...2nd RESPONDENT/GOMPLA|NANT '" I 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 call for the records in connection with C.C.No.989 of 2025, on the file of Court of Vlll th Metropalitan Magistrate of First Class Cyberabad at Medchal Malkajgiri District and QUASH the C.C.No.989 of 2025 against the petitioners/Accused No.1 to 4 herein. l.A. NO:2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C 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 including appearance of the petitioners in C.C.NO. 989 of 2025 on the file of Court of Vtll th Metropalitan Magistrate of First Class Cyberabad at Medchal Malkajgiri District, pending disposal of the main Crl. Petition and pass This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri SOMAVARAPU shfvnrunRAYANA, Advocate for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Addl. Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared forthe Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.14544 ot 2025 ORDER:- 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C. No.989 of 2025 on the file of Court of Vttlth Metropolitan Magistrate of First Class, Cyberabad at Medchal Malkajgiri District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) read with 3(5) BNS, Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

2. Heard Sri Somavarapu Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalta, the learned Additional Pubtic Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1- State.

3. The specific allegations against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 are that the petitioners herein have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on

10.12.2024, the petitioners were found in possession of 600 bags of PDS rice weighing around 298.30 Quintals.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that \ witlMut there being any complaint from any beneficiary alleging that j 2 ETDJ Crl.P.No.14544_2025 the rice was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent and charging the petitioners for prosecution is untenable and improper. The allegations on their face value cannot be sustained against the petitioners. Further, this Court in Crl.P.Nos.5709 of 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 herein are also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that as per prosecution, the offence said to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Sections 7 and g of the Essential commodities Act, 1955 and hence requested to pass appropriate orders.

6. Perused the material available on record.

7. sections 7 and B of the Essentiat 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 r' / 3 ETDJ Crl.P.No.14544_2025 have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer.

8. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.7227 of 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that:: *There rs 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 dishonestly misappropriated or converted to 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 to be a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction under Secfion 528 of B/VSS, 2023. Thus, continuance of proceedings agarnsf the petitioners ls abuse of process of law.'i'

9. The facts and circumstances of the present case also are 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, 2023 by applying the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein

10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.No.989 of 2025, on the file of the learned Vlllth Metropolitan Magistrate of First Class, Cyberabad at Medchal Malkajgiri District, are hereby quashed 4 ETDJ Crl.P.No.145'lt-2025

11. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// A. JAYASREE REGISTRAR OFFICER To,

1. The Vlll Metropolitan Magistrate of First Class Cyberabad at Medchal Malkajgiri District.

2. The SHO, PS Dundigal, Medchal District. 3. One CC to SRl. SOMAVARAPU SATYANARAYANAAdvocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to SRl. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies GE/pr M HIGH COURT DATED:1011112025 , ORDER CRLP.No.14544 ot 2025 l) + * '! r:':- i-l J zi ig 1$ t. tB Lrc ru[ '':.'rirr r,.ti,r.1_" ALLOWNG THE CRLP WITHOUT COSTS 4 V ")> ,..tI