The High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the ..Respondent 2. Tagur Surendar Singh, S/o Khandan Singh, Aged 51 years, Occ. Revenue State of Telangana Hyderabad lnspector (Civil Supplies), Miryalguda Nalgonda District. Respondent-2/Complainant Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Call for the records in CC No.773 of 2024 on the file of {he ll Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate at Miryalguda and quash the LA. NO: 2OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay of all further proceedings against the petitioners/A-1 & A-2 in CC No.773 ot 2024 on the file of the ll Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate at Miryalguda. pending disposal of the main criminal petition. This Petition coming on for hearlng, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr CH RAVINDER, Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA, the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF':ELANGANA AT HYDTRABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREE;I ITVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.L67L6 ol2o25 Date: 15.12.2025 Between: DhanavathuNarendar & Narendar Naik and e nother AND . . . Petitioners The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, At Hyderabad and another . .Respondents ORDER This Criminal Petition has been fik d seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.773 of 20 ,.4, on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class . dagistrate at Miryalguda, wherein the petitioners we.-: arrayed as accused Nos. 1 and 2, for the offence purr shable under Sections 42O of Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ,J )C Act). I I I 2 JSR, J Crlp _16116 _2025 2. Heard Sri Ch.Ravinder, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.V.Jithendar Rao, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.

3. The specific allegation against petitioners/accused Nos. 1 and 2 is that they have procured PDS rice from the benefrciaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profrt and on 16.04.2024 at about

07.00 hours, the petitioners were found in possession of 60 bags of PDS rice totalling 30.70 quintals.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiar5z, alleging that the rice was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent and charging the petitioners for prosecution is untenable and improper. The allegations, even taken at their face value cannot be sustained against the petitioners. Further, this Court, in Crl.P.Nos.5709 of 2Ol9 and 3349 of 2015, while considering the same situation, categorically observed that the offences alleged against th&.petitioners therein could not be continued and accordingly quashed the proceedings. The )etitioners a-re also entitled to the same relief and hence 1,: ayed to quash JSR, J Crlp'16716 2025 l l the proceedings against the petitioners.

5. The learned Additional Public Pros,::utor submits that as per prosecution, the offence saici to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating :r rd violation of Section 7 of the EC Act and requested to pe ss appropriate orders.

6. Section 7 of the EC Act contemplate ri Lat any person contravenes with the production, supply, rt stribution and trade of essential commodities in tl is regard 1S punishable. As per the prosecution, the o:titioners have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries all rr supply from the dealer. ) t

7. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in C'L.P.No.7227 of 2025 has considered the identical facts arc )bserved that: , I "There is no auerment indicating that the petitione' n ang uaA deceptiuelg induced the beneficiories to part tuith t rc supplied PDS rice or the beneficiary entrusted the PDS ice yr rchased bg them uith the petitioner and th-eg dishonesttg mist tpropiated 4 JSR, J Crlp_16716 2025 or conuerted to tlrcir ou.tn use or used it in uiolation of a lauful direction or contract. In the absence of essentiol factors, on the face of proseantion, this Court f.nds it to be a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. Tluts, continuance of proceedings against the petitioner is abuse of process of lana".

8. The facts ald circumsta_nces of the present case also similar to those in the above case and hence, this Court hnds it to be a ht case to exercise jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS by applying the same analog/ and to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.773 of 2024, on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Miryalguda, agdinst the petitioners/accused Nos. 1 arrd 2, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneons applications, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- AH.S. GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I/TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The ll Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate at 2. The Station House fficer, Miryalaguda Rura -- l.'r--.- --- Miryalaguda. I Police Station, Nalgondal|ista& r l-3g:-- t-,rt - tl tul.

3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the Si lte of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT]

4. One CC to Mr. CH RAVINDER, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies \ RC/PSL }KS HIGH GOURT DATED: 1511212025 I { f { ,} i lrE . ,: 0 6 #i 2U26 * .i- :;,, ORDER CRLP.No.16716 ot 2025 Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is Lllowed. (+ t{3-' ----r, t ,/' G 7/ 1 ; T 1I