CRLP/15915/2026 of Mogili Upender Vs The State of Telangana on 29 September 2026

ORDER

This Criminal Petition has been flled by the petitioners/accused Nos.l and 2 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.316 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nakrekal.

2. Heard Mr.Kompelii Mahesh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No. 1.

3. The specific allegation against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 is that they have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for proht and on 25.02.2023, the petitioners were found in possession of 10 quintals of PDS rice.

-

4. [,eamed counsel for the petitioners would submit that r.vithout there being any complaint from any beneficiary, alleging t,rat 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 Cr1.P.No.5709 of 2019, r,vhile considering the same situation, categorically observed thal the of-fences alleged against the petitioners therein could not be continued and accordingly qubshed the proceedrngs. The petitioners are aiso entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to qr-rash the proceedings against the petitioners

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that as per pr,rsecution, the offences said to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Section 7 of the EC Act and recluested to pass appropriate orders.

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 pet.tioners have procured PDS nce from the benefrciaries after supply from the dealer '€Pezta 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 averment indicdting thdt the petitioner in any way deceptively induced the beneficiaries to part with the supplied PDS rice or the benefciary 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 contrdct. In the absence of essential factors, on the face of prosecution, this Court fi,nds it to be a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. Thus, continuance ofproceedings against the petitioner is abuse ofprocess of law".

8. The facts and circumstances of the present case aiso 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 apply'rng 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.316 of 2024 on the file of the leamed Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nakrekal, against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 arrd 2, arc hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed ,TRUE COPY// SD/- B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nakrekal' 2, The Station House Officer, "Nakrekal Police Station, Nalgonda District t^\

3' -[wo ccs to the pubric prosecutor, High court for the State of rerangana, at llyderabad [OUT] 1 1]n" !! t_o Sri Kompeili Mahesh, Advocate tOpUCl 5 I'wo CD Copies GNK ,J

HIGH COURT DATED: 2910912026

ORDER

CRLP.No.1591 5 of 2026 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITIO N ,:\. .i.\ .\ C:.c' zl?t 0[1 $s ] k )).J ,|! ,\I- i^ \N.' N\