The High Court · 2025

2. Sri. P. Nikhil Raj, Deputy Tahsildar ( CS), Bodhan, R/o. H.No. 6-2-75, Kanteshwar, Nrzamabad Town and District, Pincode, 503002. ...RESPONDENTS/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 impugned proceedings in C.C.No. 53 of 2022, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Bodhan, in so far as Petitioner\Accused is concerned and pass such other order & orders may deem fir and proper in the circumstances of the case. I.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 interim stay of all further proceedings in proceedings in C.C. No. 53 of 2022, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Bodhan, including appearance and attendance of the petitioner / Accused, pending disposal of the above Criminal petition and pass such other order. This Petition coming on for hearing ,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri GAJE RAGHU, Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DE /I EADA CRlMINAL PETITION No.149 38 ot 202i ORDER:- 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section t1B of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking ther lourt to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused irr C.C.No.53 of 2022, on the file of the rearned Judiciar Magistrate rr First crass at Bodhan, registered for the offences punishable unde- Section 420 of IPC and Section 7A of the Essential Commodities Acl. 1955.

2. Heard Sri G.Raghu, learned counsel for the pe..i ioner/accused as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Ar ditional public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1- State.

3. The specific allegation against the petitioner/ar cused is that he has procured PDS Rice from the beneficiaries at ,) leaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 23.02.2022 al 191 0 hours, the petitioner was found in possession of pDS Rice contair ing in 50 Kgs Plastic Bags (10 in number), total weighing 5 quintals.

4. Learned counser for the petitioner wourd furthe r submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiarr alleging that the Rice was procured deceptively or with a criminal in ent, charging petitioner for prosecution is untenable and inrl roper. The l the \ 2 EIO) Crl.P.No 14938 2025 allegations on his face value cannot be sustained against the petitioner. 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 petitioner herein is also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner'

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that as per prosecution, the offence said to have been committed by the petitioner is cheating and violation of Sections 7 and B of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. He further submitted that charge sheet has been filed in this case vide C.C.No.S3 of 2022, which is pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Bodhan and hence requested to pass appropriate orders.

6. Perused the material available on record.

7. Sections 7 and B of the Essential Commodities Act contemplate that any person contravenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential cornmodities or abetment in this regard, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioner 3 ETO,] Crl.P rlo.14918 2025 herein has procured PDS rice from the ration car I holders after supply from the dealer.

8. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.7l 27 o'f 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that:- ) ) "There is no averment indicating that the petitioner:; deceptively induced the beneficiaries to part with the s n any way ,pplied PDS rice or the beneficiary entrusted the PDS rice purchitl with the petitioners and they dishonestly misapp, ed by them tpriated or convefted to their own use or used it in violation of a le I or contract. ln the absence of essential factors, ott prosecution, this Coud finds it to be a fit case lo , jurisdiction under Section 528 of 8NSS, 2023. Thus, cc ful direction the face of xercise the ttinuance of proceedings against the petitioners ls abuse of proces: ,f law." I I

9. The facts and circumstances of the presen: case also are similar to those in the above case and hence, this Co rrt finds it to be a fit case to exercise jurisdiction under Section 528 tf BNSS, 2023 by applying the same analogy and to quash the pror;r edings against the petitioner herein.

10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is all,r ved and the proceedings against the petitioner/accused in C.C.N: 53 of 2O22, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Cl rss at Bodhan, are hereby quashed. 4 ETOJ Cd-P.No.14938_2025

11. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/.M JAWAHAR REDDY AS STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// S CTION OFFICER I oT

1. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Bodhan. 2. The Station House Officer, Bodhan Police Station, Nizamabad District 3. One CC to SRl. GAJE RAGHU Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad. 5. Two CD Copies EPR/PSL , 1d HIGH COURT DATED:'1711112025 ORDER CRLP.No.14938 of 2025 CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED -.4.. 1 ,. '-: ,' \\ t'-r. -\.. ffiIj 1'- \ ti 1r f -r-!.-----' l i l I l i