Telangana High Court
CRLP/15956/2026 of Vaijinath Jamedar, Vs The State of Telangana, on 29 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF SEPTEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 15956 OF 2026 Between: 1. Vaijinath Jamedar, S/o Dudappa, Wrongly shown in F I R as Vijayanath
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF SEPTEIVBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 15956 OF 2026
Between:
1. Vaijinath Jamedar, S/o Dudappa, Wrongly shown in F I R as Vijayanath age.
40 years,Occu. Business Prop. Balali Traders, whole saleand Retail Grain Merchant, Sy.no.31 9, Natraj nagar,Rajendra nagar,Telangana -500 030
2. Afsar Miyan, S/o Osman Ali, age 45years,Occu.owner of lorry, R/o H.no 1- 34,lVlarkunda Taluq, Bidar district, Karnataka state- 585227
3. Nagesh, S/oSangappa, age.28 years,Occu. Driver, R/o Dhangargalli, [\ilarkunda, Bidar district, Ka rnatka-585227
.,.PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3
AND
1 The State of Telangana, (S. H.O. Patancheru Police station) Rep.by Public Prosecutor, High of Judicature at Hyderabad
2. Khaleel Ahmed, s/o late Shaik lt/adar, Age. 40 years,Occu. Deputy Tahasildar,(CS), Patancheru mandal O/o District Civil Supplies Office (CS)'
Sangareddy district.
...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the l\/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Quash the proceedings against the petitioners No's 1 to 3 herein in FIR NO. 1 166 of 2026, Daled.25'8-2026 on the file of S.HO.P S. Patancheru, Sangareddy district.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2026
Petition under section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated rn the lt/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings agarnst the of petitioners/accused no's 1 to3 in FIR
NO 1 166 of 2026, daled.25-8-2026 on the file of S.HO.P S Patancheru, Sangareddy district.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri tvl PARMA
REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, the Addl P ubhc P rosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. '1 a nd none appeared on beh alf of the Respondent No.2.
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE J.SREENIVI\S RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.15956 of 2026
CNR.No.HBHC01067 0632026
Date:29.09.2026
Between
Vaijinath Jamedar and 2 others
Petitioners
AND
The State of Telangana, and another
...Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This Criminal Petition has been fi1ed seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.1 166 of 2026 of patancheru police Station, Cyberabad, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.1 tc, 3, for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatil,s Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 and Section 7 of the Telangana Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1971.
Heard Mr.M.Parma Reddy, leamed counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents -
3. The specific allegation against the petitioners is that they have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 25.08.2026, the petitioners were found in possession of 244.55 quintals of PDS rice.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary, aileging 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.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 petitioners are also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.
5. The leamed Additional Public Prosecutor submits that as per prosecution, the offences said to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'EC Act') and requested to pass appropriate orde rs.
J
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 benefrciaries after supply from the dealer. 'l A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.p.No.7227 of 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that "Ihere is no ayerment mdicating thot the pelitioner in ony way deceptitely induced the beneJiciuries to part with the supplied I,DS rica or the benefciary entrusted the PDS rice purchased by them with the pelitioner and they dishonestly misappropriated or convertecl tr.t their oun use or used it in t'iolation of u lawful direction or contract. [n the qbsence oJ' essenttal facktrs, on the face ofprosecution, this Courtfinds it to be afil qtse to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 ttf BNSS, 2023. Thus, continuence of proceedings qgdinst the petitioner is qbuse of proce'ss o.f 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 ol' BNSS by applFng the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein.
9. ;\ccordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in FIR No. 1 166 of 2026 of Patancherr-r Police Station.
-
To, Cyberabad, against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed SD/-C. DEEPIKA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/i SECTION OFFICER
1. The Addl. Junior civil Judge cum Addl. Judicial lVlagistrate of First class, Sangareddy
2. The Station House Officer, Po ce Station Patancheru, Sangareddy district'
3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for the State of Tetangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]
4. One CC to SRl. M PARMA REDDY Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CD Copies TPK/GNK t Y\\'-
HIGH COURT DATED: 2910912026
ORDER
CRLP.No.15956 of 2026 CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED t SlATE Os sl 0t1zstt a A tr)oo t /\,1 + BI (-,
! o-l-