CRLP/15786/2026 of Pasumarthi Nageswar Rao Vs The State of Telangana on 28 September 2026

ORDER

This Climinal Petitio.n has been filed bv the petitioner/accused No.5 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.l66 of 2025, on the file of leamed II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Miryalaguda.

2. Heard Mr.S.Rama Mcrnan Rao, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor for responderts

3. The speciiic allegation against the petitioner that he has procured PDS rice lrom tbe [;.r 'refi c i.:ries at cheaper rate to sell ,) the same for profit ancl cn 12.08.2024, the petitioner was found in possession of 200 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 crirninal 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 Crl.P.No.5709 of 2019, while considering the same situation' categorically observed that the sffences alieged 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 Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short '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 pr.rnishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioner has 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 has considered the identical facts and observed that: "There is no tyerment indicating ihat the petitioner in any wuy deceptivel; induced the benef.ciaries to part with the supplied PDS rice or lhe bene,ficiary entrusted the PDS rice pu,chased by thent with the petilioner and rhey dishonestll' misappropriated or converted to their own use or used t in violalion of a law{ul direction or contrqct. In lhe absence ol essential factors, on tlte [cca of proseculion, this Coart finds it to be a fit cq.te to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. Thus. continuonce of proceedings against the petitioner is tbuse of process o/ lo,t"'.

8. The facts and circumstances of the present case also sirnilar to those in the above case and hence, this Court finds it to be a fit case to exercise iurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS by applying the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein.

9. Accordrngly, the Crirrriral Perition is alloweil and the proceedings in C.C.No.l66 t:!.2025. on the file of leamed II

i Additional .ludicial First Class Magistrate. at Miryalaguda, against the petitioneriaccused No.5, are hereby quashed. Pentling miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/i SECTION OFFICER The ll Addl. Judicial First crass Magistrate at Miryarguda (with records if any) 2 The Station Dtstrict 3 Two ccs to PUBLTG PROSECUTOR High court for the state of rerangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

4. One CC to SRl. S RAMA IMOHAN RAO Advocate tOpUCl

5. Two CD Copies TPK/GNK

To

House Officer, Police Station lrrliryalaguda Rural, Nalgonda HIGH COURT DATED: 28109t2026

ORDER

CRLP.No.15786 of 2026 CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED \ \ ( 1 $E sTAIF 06 [[I 2m P rlt 1<. l I I ...''...,./