CRLP/15906/2026 of Soma Venkatesh Vs The State of Telangana on 29 September 2026

ORDER

This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused No.l seeking to quash the proceedings 1n C.C.No.3030 of 2026 on the fi1e of the learned VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Nampaliy.

2. Heard Mr.Thomas Lloyd, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No. i

3. The specific allegation against the petitioner/accused No.1 is that he has procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and ot 12.02.2025, the petitioner was found i.qpossession of 650 Kgs of PDS rice.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary, alleging that the nce was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent and charging the petitioner for prosecution is untenable and improper The allegations, 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 learned 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. 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 petitioner has procured PDS rice fiom the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer =-rrEr*!7 1 . A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.7227 of 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that: "There is no ayerment indicatin& that the petitioner in any way decept ely induced the beneficiaries to part with the supplied PDS rice or the beneficiary entn$ted the PDS rice purchased by them with the petitioner and they dishonestly misapproprid.ted or converted to their own use or used t in vir.tlation of a lawful direction or contract. In the absence of essenlial factors, on the face ofprosecution, thi.t Courtfinds it to be afil cuse to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 qfBNSS, 2023. Thus, continuqnce of proceed.ings against the petitioner ts abu.te of ltrocess 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 petitioner herein

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.3030 of 2026 on the flle of the leamed VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Nampally, against the petitioner/accused No. 1 , are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed SD/- A.H.S. GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY' SECTIk:;.,* 'l . The Vll Additional Chief Metropolitan tVlagistrate Court' Nampally Z fhe Strtion House Officer, tS' SaOan Poli^ce Stalion HYderabad

3. Trvo CCs to the proti" pios"cutor, High Court for the State of Telangana' at Hvderabad [OUT] To,

4 One CC to Sri Thomas Lloyd, Advocate [OPUC]-

5. Two CD Copies GNK Y4-

HIGH COURT DATED: 2910912026

ORDER

CRLP.No.'15906 ol 2026 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION (,} 05 ffT 2m

- "==::-'-::=: /'-dirtt s::i1 2i-' 1 -.i: .-) ti ii \".:: \:..;i'.:... .S"L \+ z(oF6 q