The High Court · 2025

1. The State Of Telangana, Rep. by its Public prosecutor, High Court of TG, at Hyderabad

2. Mirza lmran Baig, Jr.El Civil Supplies Dept, TG, Hyderabad- cell. 97000235174 ...RespondenUDefacto Gomplainants 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 C.C. No.14265 of 2024 on the file of the Vll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad against the petitioners/ accused and to pass such other order or order as this Hon'ble Court may be deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 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 to grant STAY of all further proceedings including the appearance of the petitioner/ accused in C.C.No.'14265 of 2024 on the file of the Vll Additional Chief Metropblitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad , pending disposal of the above criminal petition, and pass such other order or or(l rrs as this Hon,ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the cir e. This Petition coming on for hearing upon perusing .l e Memorandum of upon hearing il e arguments of Petitioners and thr> Sri Jithender Rao r on behalf of the Rr: ,pondent No.1, and Grounds of Criminal petition and Sri C.VIVEKANAND, Advocate for the Veeramalla, Additional public prosecuto none appeared for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the following: ORDER a INTHE HIGH COURT F'ORTHE STATE OT'TELANGANA ATHYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.17320 of 2025 Date:22.12.2025 Between: Syed Liyaqath and another AND ...Petitioners State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court ofTelangana and another ...Respondents ORDER This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.l4265 of 2024, on the file of the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos. I and 2, for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'EC Act').

2. Heard Mr.C.Vivekanand, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithendar Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public ProseEDfor for respondent No.l fFt! 2

3. The specific allegation against the petitionerr I rccused Nos.l and 2 is that they have procured PDS rice from the lenehciaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 07.ll.2024 at about 12:40 hours, the petitioners were found in possessio t of30 bags of PDS rice totalling 10.78 quintals.

4. Leamed counsel for the petitioners wou[, I submit that without there being any complaint from any bencl oiary, alleging that the rice was procured deceptively or with a cri r inal intent and charging the petitioners for prosecution is untenablt and improper. The allegations, even taken at their lace value can I tt be sustained against the petitioners. Further, this Court, in Crl P.Nos.5709 of 2019 and 3349 of 2015, while considering the ame situation, categorically observed that the olfences allegt C against the petitioners therein could not be continued and accr,t Jingly quashed the proceedings. The petitioners are also entitled tr the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against I re petitioners.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor stt mits that as per prosecution, the offences said to have been ct r rmitted by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Section 7 of the EC Act and requested to pass appropriate orders. 3

6. Section 7 of the EC Act contemplate that any person contravenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential commodities, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioners have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer.

7. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.7227 of 2025 tI has considered the identical facts and observed that: "There is no avermenl indicating thal the petitioner in any way deceptively induced the beneficiaries to part with the supplied PDS rice or the beneficiary enlr-usted the PDS rice purchased by them with the pelitioner and they dishonestly misappropiated or converled to their own use or used it in vi<tlalion of a lawful tlirection or contrdct- In the absence of essential factor.s, on lhe face of proseclttion, this Court finds it to be a fil case to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 ofBNSS, 2023. Thus, continuance ofproceedings againsl the petitioner is abuse ofprocess of 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 applying the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.14265 of 2024, on the hle of the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, 4 Hyderabad, against the petitioners/accused Nos'l and 2, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any shall stand closed \ \ To, SD/- K MADHAVI' ASSII; TANT REGISTRAR. l; SECTION OFFTCER //TRUE COPY// l.TheVllAdditionalChiefJudicialMagistrateatNampallalHyderabad. 2. The Station House officer' Madannapet Police Station, l yderabad. 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor' High Court for the S:i te of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

4. One CC to SRI C.VIVEKANAND Advocate IOPUCI 5. Two CD CoPies o NVB HIGH COURT DATED:22 112t2025 . a2: u'. JR Ltc q. ...r . j t.'O liiJii-- 'il --.,r '+ 1.. '\ :, ORDER CRLP.No.17320 ot 2025 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETTTION a + Z .c ..\ .t- _, i l,cil -L., ',...-^r-t:-a ) ll t)r. \ ii.: