The High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana. Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, at HYderabad.

2. Sri. A. Naresh Kumar, Sub-lnspector, Velgatoor P S,, Jagtial District' Pincode

505526. ..Respondents/C om Pla ina nt Petition under section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petrtion, the High court may be pleased to is therefore prayed that this Court may be pleased 1o quash. the impugned proceedings in i C No 1541 of 2022, on the file of the Judicial Magiftrate of First Cliss at Dharmapuri and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 PetitionunderSection52BofBNSSprayingthatinthecircumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High court may be pieaseo to grant interim stay of all further proceedings in c.c.No. 1541 of 2022, on if," fit" oi th" Jrdi"irl Magistrate of First Class at Dharmapuri ' including appearance and attendance of the petitioners/Accused Nos' 1 to 3' pending disposal of the above Criminal petition and pass such other .)rder or orders may deem fit and proper in tne circumstances of the case. This Petition corning on for hearrng, upon perusing the [\4emorandum of Grounds of Crrminal P,rtitron and upon hearing the argumelts of Mr. G. Raghu Advocate for the Petitioners and of lvlr. Jithendar Rao V:r;ranr,alla, Additional Public Prosecutor orr behalf of the Respondent No 1 and of lr one aopeared for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 15867 of 2025 DATE: 02.12.2025 Between: Direeravath Gasiram and tu,o others AND Petitioners / accused Nos. 1 to 3 The State of 1'clangana, Rep. bv its Pul)lic Proseclltor, High Court ol-fclangana at Fll,dcrabad and anottrcr :ORDER: Rcspondents This Criminal Petition has been filed undcr Scction 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNSSJ bi.the petitione rs / accusecl Nos. 1 to 3 seeking to quash thc proccedings in C.C.No. 154 1 ol 2022 cn the filc of thc Judicial Magisrr:rrc ol l.'irst Class aL Dharmapuri, for thc oflcnces under Section 420 of thc IpC and Ser:tion 7 of Dsscntial Commodities Act, 1955 (for short, .trS Act ).

2. Hcard Mr. G. Raghu, learned counsel foi the peritioners and Mr. Jithendar Rao Veeramalia, learned Adciitional public prosecutor appcaring for respor-rdcnr No. i State. i 1 ,{

3. Learnec counsel lor thc petitioners su[)n ils that thc specilic iLllcgation .rgainst pctitioncr Nos. 1 and 2/accust, l Nos. I rlncl 2 is that they procurec I)DS rice from thc bcneficiarics zl r:hez, )cr rirtc and to scll thc samr: ior proht to pctitioner No.l)/irccirsed No.3 and the l)etitioners wr:rc lonncl posscssion ninc (9) [,[)S -ice bags, weighing :rbout four qu intals

3. 1 . He i,rrthcr submittcd t hal rr'ithout thcre lr :ing. anv r:omplaint irom any iret:r:ficiarr allceing tilat the rjce \r,'i,:t rtrr>cLtrcd cleceplive il r>r u,ith a crinrinal intent and charging the pctrti,rrrcrs lor prosecution is untenablc and intproper. Thc allcgation:; , n tlreir face valne cannot be sustainccl agairrst tlte petitioners. F Lirthcr , this Court in Crl.P.No.5 /O9 ol 2019 an<l 33.19 of 2015, lvhile :onsi:le ring the same situation, categoricallv obscrvccl tltat thc offcrrr:;r:: alk:gcd against the pctitioner therein cannol lte continued and qu:r:;1-r:d rre proceedings. The petitioners are :rlso cnti[lecl to the same rc it l anC hence praycd to quash the proceeclings against thc pctitioncrs.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor :Lrbmifted that as per prosecution, lhc oflence said to har.c becr: contmitted by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Section I rtr-rd 3 of ES Act and requested to pass appropriate orders.

5. Sections 7 and 8 of ES Act contemplrtc tLrat any person contravene s u,it.h the production, supply, dist i'irlulic,n and trade oi' .-,. I 1 i i I I I :i:rFl ) esscntial commodiLies or abeLmcllL in this regard, is punishable. As per thc prosecution, the pctitroners have procured pDS rice from the bcncficiarics after supply. from the dcaler,

6. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.p.No.722T of 2025 has consrdcrcd thc identical facts and obscrved that: "Thcre is no avermcnt indicating that the petitioner in an1, u,a-v deceptivell induccd tl-re bcnchci:rries to part wlth the supphcd PDS rice or the beneficiarv cnrrusted the pDS rice purchased b1, them with the p(titjoner and they dishonestly misappropriated or convertcd to thcir own use or used it in r, iolation ol a las{ul direc[ir_.,n or contract. In thc abscnce of essential facrors, on the face of prosecution, this Court finds it to bc a lit case to cxercise the jur rsdiction under Section 52g o[ BNSS, 2023 Thus. continu:rnce of proceedings against the petitioner is abuse oI process o[ iaw,,. \ I

7. The facts and circumstances of the prcsenl case also similar to those in the abovc case and hencc, this Court finds it to bc a fit case to excrcisc jurisdiction under Scction 52g of BNSS by applying the same analo€S/ and to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein.

8. Accordingll,, the Criminal pe tition is allowed and the procccdings in C.C.No.l54 I ol 2022 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate ol First Class at Dharmapuri, against the petitione rs / accused Nos. I to 3, are hereby quashed. I I i ,+ Misccllaneous applications, pcnding if anv. :hall siLand closed //TRUE COPY// SD,/. HUSSAIN ALI ASSISiTANT REGISTRAR SE€ rION OFFICER To, 1 2 3

4. The Judicial Magistrate of I Class at Dharmapurr The Station House Officer, Jagrtyal District, Velgatoor polrce Station Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, State of Telangana tirgh (lourt Buildings at Hyderabad (OUT) One CC to lVlr G. Raghu, Advocare IOPUC] Two CD Copies DL/Sa HIGH COURT DAf ED:0211212025 ORDER CRLP.No.15867 ot 2025 \a // \ *f{ I11 '\- ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION \