The High Court · 2025

1. Sadula Srinu,, S/o. Siddi Ramulu, Age. 28 years, Occ. Scrap Business, FJo. 9-671N1, It/amidipally village, Armoor lvlandal, Nizamabad District, Telangana State. 503223

2. Kondapalli Ramesh,, S/o. Shekar, Age.28 years, Occ.Business, R/o. 8-4, Dharyapur Village, Navipet lrilandal, Nizamabad District, Telangana State503223 ...PETTTTONER/ACCUSED(S) AND

1. The State of Telangana,, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana

2. Akula Mahesh Kumar,, S/o. Late Gangadhar, Age48 years, Occ.Deputy (UDRI)(CS), l/C DharpallyRl/o. Vinayak Nagar, Nizamabad District, Telangana State ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the ft/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in CC No. 861 of 2025 on the file of the Hon'ble Vth Additional Judicial First class Magistrate at Nizamabad in so far as petition ers/accused No. 1 and 2. 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 grant stay of all further proceedings against the petitioners in CC No. 861 of 2025 on the file of the Hon'ble V Additional Judicial First class Magistrate at Nizamabad pending disposal of the main criminal petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing t te lrrlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argun rnts of Sri ALLURI DIVAKAR REDDY ,Advocate for the Petitioner and { ri. Jithender Rao Veeramalla the Additional Public Prosecutor (TG) on beha f of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVIEADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.'|51'13 of 2025 ORDER: This Criminal petition is filed by the petltioners/accused Nos l and 2 under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS, 2023') seeking quashment of proceedings in C C.No.B61 of 2025 on the file of the learned V Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nizamabad, registered for the offences under Section 318 (4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023 (for short 'BNS') and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955

2. Heard Mr.Alluri Divarkar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No 1- State 3 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the specific allegation against the petitioners is that they have procured PDSricefromthebeneficiariesatcheaperratetosellthesamefor profit and on27.03.2025 at 10.00 hours, the petitioners were found in possession of 4.60 quintals of PDS rice.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit thatwithouttherebeinganycomplaintfromanybeneficiary,alleging that the rice was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent and charging the petitioners for prosecution is untenable and improper' r 2 The allegations on their face varue cannot be susta r ed against the petitioners. Further, this Court in Crl.p.Nos.5709 ot .,t r19 and 33493 of 2015 whire considering the same situation, categcr oaily observed that the offences alleged against the petitioners thr; ein cannot be continued and quashed the proceedings. The petitir ners are also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed o quash the proceedings against the petitioners. 5 The learned Additional public prosecutr submits that as per prosecution, the offence said to have been ccr rmitted by the petitioners is cheating and violation of section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and requested to pass appropr ate orders.

6. Perused the material available on record. 7 Section 7 0f the Essentiar commodities A( t contemprate that any person contravenes with the production, sup l y, distribution and trade of essentiar commodities in this regard, is c rnishabre. As per the prosecution, the petitioners have procured pD S rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer. B. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr.).No.7227 of 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed tl at: "There is no averment indicating that the pe1i1 oners in any way deceptively induced the beneficiaries to pa_1 with the supplied PDS rice or the beneficiary entrusted the ,DS rice purchased by them with the petitioners and they di! hones y misappropriated or converted to their own use or t;ed it in --- 3 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 Section 52g of BNSS, 2023. Thus, continuance of proceedings against the petitioners is abuse of process of law.,,

9. The facls 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 S2B of BNSS by applying the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein.

10. Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.861 of 2025 on the file of the learned V Additional Judiciar First crass Magistrate at Nizamabad, against the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and2, are hereby quashed. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed S i- K. BHAVANI SWAMY SISTANT REGISTRA i/TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To The V Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nizamabad, Nizamabad District.

2. The SHO Dharpally potice Station, Nizamabad District. 3. The UDRI (CS), I/C Dharpa y, Nizamabad District. 4. One CC to SRt. ALLURT DTVAKAR REDDy Advocate IOPUC] 5. Two Copies to pUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

6. Two CD Copies PK/?R 1,-d HIGH COURT DATED:1911112025 CRLP.No.15113 of 2025 i) i_t, ?ui .. ,1, ;, it i ,:_ | l'.i.\'+ \:, \ CRIMINAL PEITITION IS ALLOWED AND THE PROI;EEDINGS IN C.C. NO.861 OF 2025 AGAINST THE PETITIONERSi ACCUSED NOS. 1 & 2 ARE HEREBY QUASHED. \