The High Court · 2025

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

2. Myaka Srinivas, S/o. Sayanna, Age 47 years, Occ: Dy. Tahasildar (CS), Nizamabad Rural, R/o. H.No. 5-1 1-25, Yellammagutta, Ni2amabad Town.an'd District , Telangana State. 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 proceedings in CC No. 937 of 2024 on the file of the Hon'ble ll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nizamabad in so far as petitioners/Accused No. 1,2 and 4. ...RESPONDENTS n 2 F 0 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 /Accused No. 1, 2 and 4 in CC No. 937 of 2024 on the file of the Honorable ll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nizamabad pending disposal of the main criminal petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri ALLURI DIVAKAR REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Fublic Prosecutor for the State of Telangana on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for Respondent no.2. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.15296 of 2025 ORDER:- 1. This Criminal Petition is filed underl Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1, 2 & 4 in C.C.No.937 of 2024, on the file of the learned ll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nizamabad, registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC and Section 7 read with Section 3(2)(eXf) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

2. Heard Sri Alluri Divakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 , 2 & 4 as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1- State.

3. The specific allegation against the petitioners is that they procured PDS Rice from the card holders at cheaper rate and used to sell the same on higher price for profit and on 17.01.2024 at about 11.36 A.M., the petitioners were found in possession of 827 bags of PDS Rice weighing about 385.90 Quintals. \ 2 ETOJ Crl.P.No.15296 2025

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary alleging that the Rice was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent, charging the petitioners for prosecution is untenable and improper. The allegations leveled against the petitioners cannot be sustained. Further, this court in crl.P.Nos.570g of 2o1g 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 has submitted that as per prosecution, the offences said to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Sections 7 and 8 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 Essentiar commodities Act contemplate that any person contravenes with the production, suppy,,'distribution and trade of essentiat commodities or 3 ETDJ Crl.P.No.15296_2025 abetment in this regard, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioner herein had procured PDS rice from the card holders after supply from the dealer. B. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.7227 of 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that:- "There is 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 essenfial factors, on the face of prosecution, this Court finds it to be a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction under Secflon 528 of BNSS, 2023. Thus, continuance of proceedirygs against the petitioners is abuse of process of law." ^ t

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, 2 & 4 in C.C.No.9 37 of 2024, on the file of the learned ll Additional I I I 4 ETO,J Crl.P.No.15295_2025 Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nizamabad, are hereby quashed.

11. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed /TRUE COPY// Sd/. C. DEEPIKA TANT REGISTRAR CTION OFFICER To

1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Jadcherla. 2. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High court for the state of Telangana, at 3. One CC to SRl. ALLURI DIVAKAR REDDY, Advocate [OPUCI 4 Two CD Copies Hyderabad [OUT] Tpk/pr 4y // / HIGH COURT DATED t2111112025 t / ORDER CRLP.No.15296 of 2025 lHE Sr4 0 B JAr{ 2[26 (J C) ( .t .r) :;) t ALLOWING THE CRL.PETITION %