The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the ltrlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in CC No. 1900 of 2024 on the file of the Special Judicial Magrstrate Of First class for Trial of cases under TS Prohibition and Excise Act Cum- IVth Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nizamabad in so far as petitioner/sole accused 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 against the petitioner/sole accused in CC No. '1900 of 2024 on the file of Special Judicial Magistrate Of First class for Trial of cases under TS Prohibition and Excise Act Cum- lVth Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nizamabad pending disposal of the main criminal petition This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing I re lt/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argurr lnts of Sri ALLURI DIVAKAR REDDY ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr V.Jitl-r nder Rao Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No'1 . and one appear for the Respondent No2. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1507E ot 2025 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surarshe. Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS, 2023') seeking quashment of proceedings in C.C.No.1900 of 2024 on the file of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Trial of Cases under T.S. Prohibition and Excise Act-cum- lV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nizamabad, registered for the offences under Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'BNS'), Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 17(e) of the Telangana State Civil Supplies of Public Distribution System Act, 2016.

2. Heard Sri Alluri Divakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the specific allegation against the petitioner is that he has procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 06.09.2024, the petitioner was found in possession of 8.90 quintals of PDS rice.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary, alleging I ) 2 that the rice was procured deceptively or r,vith a c'i ninal intent anci charging the petitioner for proseiution is untenabl r and improper. The allegations on their face value cannot be slrst? ned against the petitioner. Further, this Court in Crl.P.Nos.5709 of :01Q and 33493 of 2015 vrhilc considering the same situation, cate(,, ,rically observed that the offences alleged against the petitioner t I :rein cannot be continued and quashed the proceedings. The I entitled to the same relief and hence praye j :titioner is also to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosect lor submits that as per prosecution, the offence said to have been < cmmitted by the petitioner is cheating and vioiation of Section 7 >f the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and requested to pass apptr priate orders.

6. Perused the material available on recor t.

7. Section 7 of the Essential Commoditie; Act contemplate that any person contravenes with the production, st pply, distribution and trade of essential commodities in this regard, i ; punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioner has procured F) )S rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer.

8. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in )rl.P.No.7227 of 2025 has'considered the identical facts and observ: J that: "There is no averment indicating that the )etitioners in any \^/ay deceptively induced the beneficiaries tc :art with the 3 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 lawfui 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 52g 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 528 of BNSS by applying the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein. '10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.190O of 2024 on the file of the tearned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Trial of Cases under T.S. Prohibition and Excise Act-cum-lV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nizamabad, against the petitioner-accused, are hereby quashed. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed SD/. B. REKHA RANI AS ISTANT REGIST //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER To, {_ -:=@Ei{--._ 1 The Soecial Judicial Magistrate of First class for Trial of cases under fS piiniUiiion and Excisi Act Cum- lVth Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nizamabad :if.ffi3slE!{Eit ,/ .,, .l" ---

2. The Station House Officer, Police Station lvlakloor, Niz:rr rabad District 3. One CC to SRl. ALLURI DIVAKAR REDDY Advocate [r- 4. Two CC to SRl. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High court for 1e state of )UC] Telangana at Hyderbad [OUT] I

5. Two CD Copies AG/SA Yt- HIGH COURT DATED:1811112025 \ \ t lE SIa. 0 I I lr 202$ ,C-\+-l () ) (J t |,..) J:i,' I ORDER CRLP.No.15078 of 2025 GRLP IS ALLOWET] q, c-o

6.4 +\or