The High Court · 2025

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

2. Syed Mujahid,, C/o. Not Known, Age. 39 years, Occ. Police officer, R/o. Adilabad Rural, PS, Adilabad District 504001. ...RespondenUDefacto Complainant 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 C.C.No. 247 ot 2025 on the file of Spl. Judicial First Class Magistrate (PCR) Adilabad against the petitioner/Accused No.3 and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case l.A. NO: 1 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 in C.C.No. 247 of 2025 on the file of Spl. Judicial First Class Magistrate (PCR) Adilabad including the appearance of the petitioner, pending disposal of the above Criminal petition and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Soma Ravi Kiran Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Mr. V. Jithendar Rao, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of None appeared for the Respondent No. 2i. The Court made the following: ORDER t/ IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE, OF'TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENTVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.I6066 of 2025 Date: 05.12.2025 Between: M.Javeed M. Yusuf Sheikh AND ...petitioner The State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State ot'Telangana at Hyderabad and another respondents ORDER This Crirninal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.247 of 2025, on the file of the leamed Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (PCR), Adilabad, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as accused No.3, for the offences punishable under Section 3 l8(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955

2. Heard Sri Soma Ravi Kiran Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.V.Jithendar Rao, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1. [: 2

3. 1-he specific allegation against the petitionei/accused No.3 is that he has procured pDS rice from the beneficiarics at cheaper rate to sell the sarne fbr prolit and on t0.10.2024 at about 20:00 hours, the petitioner was found in possession of 5.5 quintals of pDS rice. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without there being any cornplaint from a.,\, beneficiary, alleging that the rice rvas procured deceptivelv or.rvith a criminal intent and charging the petitioner for prosecutio, is untenable and impr()per. I'he allegations, even taken at his face value cannot be sustained against the petitioner. Furth<:r, this court in crl.P.No.5;709 of 2019 and 3349 of 2015 while co.sidering the same situation. categoricalry observed that the oflfe,nces alleged against the petitioners therein cannot be continuecl and quashed the proceedings. The petitioner is also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against fie petitioner. 5. The learned Additionar public prosecutor subrnits that as per prosecution, the offence said to have been comrnitted by the petitioner is cheating and violation of Section 7 of the Essential commodities Act, r95s and requested to pass appropriate orders. 3

6. Sections 7 and 8 of the Essential Commodities Act contemplate that any person contravenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential commodities or abetment in this regard, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioner has procured PDS rice frorn the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer.

7. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.7227 of \ 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that: "There is no avermcnt indicating that the pctitioner in any way deceptivcly induced the beneficiaries to part with the supplied PDS rice or the beneficiary entrusted the PDS rice purchased by them with the petitioner and they dishonestly misappropriated or converted to their own use or used it in violation of a lawful direction or contract. In the absence of cssential factors, on the face of prosecution, this Court finds it to be a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. Thus, continuattce of proceedings against the petitioner is abuse of process ot'law".

8. 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 apptying the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein I 4

9. l,ccordingly, the criminal petition is allorved and the proceedings in c.c.No. 247 of 202s, on the fire of the learned Special Judicial First class Magisrrate (pcR), Adirabad, against the petitioner/accused No.3, are hereby quashed. Pe'nding miscellaneous apprications, ir. any, shall stand closed. /TRUE COPY// SD/. B.REKHA RANI S ANT REGISTRAR CTION OFFICER .i Y To,

1. The Special Judicial First Class [Vlagistrate (PCR) at Adilabad. 2. The Station House Officer, Adilabad District, Adilabad-R Police Station. 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, State of Telangana, High Court Buildings, at Hyderabad (OUT)

4. One CC to Sri. Soma Ravi Kiran Reddy, Advocate IOPUC] 5. Two CD Copies DL 4W f / HIGH COURT JSR, J DATED:0511212025 ORDER CRLP.No.16066 o12025 o c_) ( * lliE $ 1 C i[-l] P, ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION \) Yv