The High Court · 2025

2. Sri. CH. Sudheer Rao, Sub-lnspector, Raikal P.S., Jagtial District. Pincode: 505460. ...RESPON DENT/COMPLAINANTS ' 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. 176 of 2025, on the file of the I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Jagtial. 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 pleased to grant interim stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No. 176 of 2025, on the file of the I Additional Judicial lilagistrate of First Class at Jagtial., including appearance and attendance of the petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 and 2, pending disposal of the above Criminal. 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 Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No 1 and None appeared for Respondent No. 2 The Court made the following: ORDER :.:r:'r .]-aa 1 HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELAI. GANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA Dt VI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1 5675of 20 15 DATE OF ORDER:- 28.11.2025 BETWEEN: Teka Raju & another. AND The State of Telangana rep by its Public Prosecutor- High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad & another Petitioners Respondents ORDER:- 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section { 28 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seekin, to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused I' os.1 & 2 in C.C.No.176 of 2025, on the file of the learned I 1,, ditional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Jagtial, registered f rr the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS, 2023 =rd Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

2. Heard Sri G.Raghu, learned cour sel for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 & 2 as well as S r Jitender Rao \ 2 C.I.P.Nd.15575 2025 Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1- State.

3. The specific allegation against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 & 2 is that they procured PDS Rice from the ralion card holders at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 07.0'l .2025 al around 20:00 hours, the petitioners were found in possession of 6 white colour plastic bags of PDS rice weighing about 03 Quintals.

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.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 has submifted that as per prosecution, the offences said to have been committed by the 3 EID,I Crl P No.156/5 2025 . I i petitioners is cheating and violation of Sections / and 8 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and hence rer uested to pass appropriate orders.

6. Perused the material available on record

7. Sections 7 and B of the Essential C) ,mmodities Act contemplate that any person contravenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential commoci ies or abetment in this regard, is punishable. As per the prosecutic r , the petitioners herein had procured PDS rice from the beneficizrr es after supply from the dealer. B A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.7 227 of 2O2S has considered the identical facts and observed that:- I I "There is no averment indicating that the petitione': in any way deceptively induced the beneficiaries to part with the upplied pDS rice or the beneficiary entrusted the PDS rice purcti sed by them with the petitioners and they dishonestly misapl ropriated or convefted to their own use or used it in violation of a t. uful direction or contract. ln the absence of essentra/ factors, c'r the face of prosecution, this Coutt finds it to be a fit case t(, exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 ofBNSS, 2023. Thus, ) ntinuance of proceedings against the petitioners rs abuse of process of law.,'

9. The facts and circumstances of the preserrr case also are similar to those in the above case and hence, this Cr urt finds it to be 4 ETD'] Ctl.P.No.15675 2025 ( l.: 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 in C.C.No.176 of 2025, on the file of the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Jagtial, are hereby quashed. 11 Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- Sd/. P.C. SULEKHA DEVI ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR G SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To,

1. The First Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Jagtial' 2. The Station House Officer, Raikal Police Station, Jagtial District' 3. One CC to SRI GAJE RAGHU, Advocate [OPUC] +. iwo cc" to the pUBLtC PROSECUTOR, High court Buitdings,High court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad [OUT]

5. Two CD CoPies. d I i I j HIGH COURT DATED:2811112025 ORDER ! / I I ;if '\A ..\ ,\. )+ c l.J J. ,.':).. O1 cEi o /::.: Lr- (\ t\. CRLP.No.15675 of 2025 t- H c ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION ) {