CRLP/16397/2026 of Abdul Raheem Vs The State of Telangana on 6 October 2026

ORDER

'Ihis Criminal Petition has been iiled bv the petit ioner/accused seeking to quash the proceedings ln C.C.No.2032 of 2021 on the file of the leamed Special Judicial Magistrate of Pirst Class Excise at Nizamaabad

2. Heard Mr.Alluri Divakar Reddy, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1

3. The specrfic allegation against the petitioner/accused is that he has procured PDS ricc from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to setl the same for profit and on 29.07.2021, the petitioner was fbund in possession of I 0.30 quintals of pDS rice.

4. Leamed counsel for the petitioner would submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary' alleging that the rice was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent and charging the petitioner for prosecution is untenable and improper' The aliegations, even taken at his face value cannot be sustained against the petitioner' Further' this Court' in Cr1'P'No'5709 of 2019, while considering the Same situation, categorically observed that the offences alleged against the petitioners therein could not be continued and accordingly quashed the proceedings' The petitioner is also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner'

5. The leamed Additional Public Prosecutor submits that as per prosecution, the offences said to have been committed by the petitioner is cheating and violation of Section 7 of the EC Act and requested to pass appropriate orders'

6. SectionToftheE'CActcontemplatethatanyperson Contlavenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential commodities, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioner has proculed PDS rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer.

A Coordinate Bench of this Courr in Crl.p.No.7Z27 of 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that: '' fheru is no avermcnt indicating thot the petitioner in any wtL;,, daceptivelv inclucccl the benefciories b pqrt with the supplied pDS rice or thc benafciarl entrusted the PDS rrce purchased b.t them with the pctitiotler (ud thar di.shonestly misappropnated or convrted b their orrn u:e or trsed it in tiolatron rd a lawful tlirectLon or cot;tract. In the ubsenc:c of essential fuctors, on the face of prosecution, thi; Court f.ncls it to bt' o fr case n exercise the jurisdiction under Section .i28 of BNSS, 2023 l'hu,t, continuqnce rl proceedings against the petiti(tner is etbuse ol protets of lav

8. 'fhe 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 bv applving the same analogy and to quash the proccedings against the petitioner herein

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.2032 of 2021 on the fi1e of the learned Spccial Judicial Magistrate of First Class Excise at Nizamaabad, against the petitionerlaccused, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if an1, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SDi. B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

1. The Special Judicral lVlagistrate of First Class Excise at Nizamabad 2 The Station House Officer, Navipet Police Station, Nizamabad -rOr

3. Two CCs to Pub c Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 4 One CC to Sri Alluri Divakar Reddy, Advocate [OpUC]

5. Two CD Copies ABK /GNK T

HIGH COURT DATED: 0611012026

ORDER

GRLP.No.1 6397 ot 2026 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION li.- ir S c H

1fi oci 2nrs l: , )r' ,r). ^ {+ \ ,P ot