Telangana High Court
CRLP/8934/2026 of Salevendra Siva Kumar Vs The State of Telangana on 24 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND IWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8934 OF 2026 Between 1. Salevendra Siva Kumar, S/o. Late Sharanappa, Age. 60 Years, Occ.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEIVBER
TWO THOUSAND AND IWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8934 OF 2026
Between
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.
1. Salevendra Siva Kumar, S/o. Late Sharanappa, Age. 60 Years, Occ. Business, R/o. H. No. 1-19, Gatpally Village, It/aheshwaram l\/andal, Ranga Reddy District
2. Ayub Hasanbhai t\ilathakia, S/o. Late Hasanbhai Valibhai I\4athakia, Age.50 Years, Occ. Agriculture. R/o. Mahika Village, Wankaner Thaluka, Ra1kot District, Gujarat State. 3 Abeed alias Bloch Abidbhai Alarakhabhai, S/o. Alarakh Bloch, Age 46 Years, Occ. Lorry Driver, R/o. Chandrapur Village, Vakanc TQ, Rajkot District, Gujarat state ...pETrroNERS/AccusED No.1 to 3 AND
1. The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., P.S. Shamshabad, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy DiStrict, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad. 2 P Anjaneyulu, S/o. Venkataiah, Age. 52 Years, Occ. Assistant Sub-lnspector of Police, P.S. Shamshabad, Cyberabad , Cell.9912394246 ...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAI NANTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that ln the clrcumstances stated in the l\,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the charge sheet in C.C, No. 98 oI 2022, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge Cum XIV Additional Metropolitan lVlagistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at Ra.jendranagar agatnst the Petrtioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 3. I.A. NO: 2 OF 2026 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the /emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedtngs including the appearance of the Petitioners/Accu sed No 1 to 3 in C C No. 98 of 2022, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge Cum XIV Additional N/letropolitan IVlagistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at Rajendranagar. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the [/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K VENUN/ADHAV. Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla. the Addl. Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No 1 and none appeared on behalf 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 JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITI ON No.8934 of 2026 C NR.No.HBH C0 1037 87 22026 Date:24.09.2026 Between: Salevendra Sir.a Kumar and two others ...Petitioners AND The State ofTelangana and another Respondents ORDtsR This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.98 of 2022 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge- cum-XIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District. at Rajendranagar
2. Heard Mr.K.Venumadhav. learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Plosecutor for respondents
.--
3. The specific allegation against the petitioners is that they have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sel1 the same for profit and on 10.07.2024, the petitioners were found in possession of 29,690 kgs of PDS rice
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that without there being any complaint from any benefrciary, alleging 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 Cour1, 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 petitioners are also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.
5. The learned 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,-l-955 (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 punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioners have procured PDS nce from the benefrciaries 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 cuerment indicdting. thdt the petiioner in anlt wuy deceptively inducetl the benefi.ciaries to pqrt with the strppliecl PDS rice or thc beneficiarv- entntsted the PDS rice purchu.sed by tht:m ytitlt the peitioner and lhey clishonestly m$appropriqted or conyerted io their own use or used tt m violation of u lawful direction or conrract. In the absence of es sentiul .factors, on th, Jice ofprosecution. this Cuurr fnds it tL) he o Jit cdse k) exercise the juristliction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2()23 Thus, continudnce ofproceedings against the petitioner i.; abuse of process 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 lht case to exerclse jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS by applying 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.C.No.98 of 2022 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-XlV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate .- ofFirst Class, Ranga Reddy District, at Rajendranagar, against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3, are hereby quashed' Pending miscellaneous applications' if any' shal1 stand closed. SD/- B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT R GISTRAR //TRUE COPY// To, SECI1ON OFFICER The Principal Junior Civil Judge Cum XIV Additional Metropolitan I/lagistrate of iirst Class Ranga Reddy District at Rajendranagar The Station House Officer' Police Station Shamshabad Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for the State of Telangana' at HYderabad [OUT] 4 One CC to SRl. K VENUMADHAV Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CD CoPies
., Nr TPK/GNK
HIGH COURT DATED: 2410912026
ORDER
GRLP.No.8934 ot 2026 ti TAi o ia( ,:) ? g SEP MzE A + tpic CRIMINAL PETITION !S ALLOWED rq .\JI )b I It ),)