Telangana High Court
CRLP/13073/2025 of Vanarasi Veeraiah Vs The State of Telangana on 9 October 2025
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUWADI SRTDEVI cRr NAL PETITIO NO: 1 73 0F Between: 1. Vanarasi Veeraiah,-s/o. Muthaiah, Aged 44years, occ Business, R/o. H.No.s- 1 49, Devunipaili
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUWADI SRTDEVI
cRr
NAL PETITIO
NO: 1
73 0F
Between:
1. Vanarasi Veeraiah,-s/o. Muthaiah, Aged 44years, occ Business, R/o. H.No.
s- 1 49, Devunipaili Kodurupaka, sufia;;bao rriinoir, -ped;;p;iti biliri;i. "
2. Motam Guruvaiph,,.s/o. Alahankali,.4geo 40 years, occ Business, R/o. H.No.
s- 1 44 t2, Devu n i pa il i Kod u ru p a ka, s u r ti ni oa o' rr,tin o a-t -Feo o jpiiiib ilfi ;t.'
3. Vanarasi Ramesh.,, S/o..Maraiah, Aged 31 years, occ Business, R/o. H.No. 3_
1, Devunipani Kodurupaka, surtanadio Mrid;i, p;dd;piiri oiitiiii- "'"
... PETITION ER/ACCUSED
AND
1. The state of retangala, Fep. by its public prosecutor, High court of Telangana, at Hyddrabad r I YYYvY'!vr '
2. Sri. Nomula Mailikarjul B.ggy,, s/o. Narsimha Reddy, Aged 47 year, occ civil suppries Deputy Tahsirdir, surthanibJd, ir;. H:iriol ro-t _s?Z:''
Karimnagar
...RESPON DENT/COMPLAINANT
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminll Fetition, tne Hijn corrt ,ry be pleased to quash- the. impugned proceedings in c.c.No. 11s of-2oii, on tne file of the Judicial- Ivlagistrate of First Ctasi at Nandimyadaram,-alainst tne petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 and 2, 3
l.A. NO:2 OF 2025
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminit Fetition, the High Court ,.y be^pleased to granl interim stay of all further pro.."dings in C.-C.trlo. 115 of 2024, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Ctass at Nandimyadaram., including appearance and attendanciof the petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 and 2, 3, pending disposal of the above Criminal petition This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri BONGONI
SAIRAM GOUD ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. Jitender Rao Veeramalla \ \
-
the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No' 1 and none appeared for the ResPondent No' 2'
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTTCE JUWADI SRIDEVI
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 is filed by the petitioners_accused Nos.1 to 3 under Section s2g of the Bharatiya Nagarik suraksha sanhita, 2023 (for short ,BNSS, 2022,) seeking quashment of proceedings in c.c.No.115 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial fvlagistrate of First class, Nandimyadaram, registered for the offences under Section 420 of the lndian penat code (for short ,lpc,) & sectio n T of the Essential commodities Act (for short 'the Act,). 02- Heard sri Bongoni sairam Goud, rearned counser for the petitioners and sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learnecl Additional Pubric prosecutor appearing for the state.
03. Learned counser for the petitioners submits that the specific allegation reveiled against the petitioners is that they had procured pDS rice from the beneficiaries at a cheaper rate with an intention to se[ the same for profit, and that on 19.09.2017, at about 22:30 hours, the petitioners were ailegedry found in possession of pDs rice, whereupon
I ,l : tr, i;*ridir ;r.
thePoliceseized66-20quintalsofPDSriceandkeptthe same under safe custodY.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submitthatwithouttherebeinganycomplaintfromany beneficiary, alleging that the rice was procured deceptively orwithacriminalintentandchargingthepetitionersfor prosecution is untenable and improper' The allegations on theirfacevaluecannotbesustainedagainstthepetitioners. Further, this Court in CRL'P'Nos'5709 of 2019' 33493 of 2015 and 1230 of 2025 while considering the same situation' categorically observed that the offences alleged against the petitioners therein cannot be continued and quashed the proceedings. The petitioners are also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.
05. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that as per prosecution' the offence said to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Sections 7 and 8 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and requested to pass appropriate orders'
06. Sections 7 and 8 of the Act contemplate that any person contravenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential commodities or abetment in this regard, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioners have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer.
07. 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 indicating that the petitioners in any way deceptively induced the beneficiaries to paft with the supptied pDS ice or the beneficiary entrusted the pDS rice purchased by them with the petitioners and they dishonestly misappropriated or converted to their own use or used it in violation of a lavvful direction or contract. ln the absence of essenfra/ factors, on the face of prosecution, this Court finds it to be a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction under Secfibn 528 of 8NSS, 2023. Thus, continuance of proceedings against the petitioners is abuse of process of law." I I I
- \ '-+81
08. The facts and circumstances of the present case also similar to those in the above cases and hence, this Court finds it to be a fit case to exercise jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS by applying the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein
09. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.115 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial ftlagistrate of First Class, Nandimyadaram, against the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 3, are hereby quashed. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed SD'. T.SRINIVASAREDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY/ SECTION OFFICER
1. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nandimyadaram'
2. ThestationHouseofficer,DharmaramPolicestation,Ramagundam
3. oneCCtoSRl.BoNGoNlSAIRAMGoUDAdvocate[oPUC]
4. Two CCs to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High court for the state of Telangana, HYderabad. [OUT]
5. Two CD CoPies ARM/PSL A To, s
HIGH COURT DATED: 0911012025
ORDER
CRLP.No.13O73 of 2025 ALLOWTNG THE CRLP ,1 ... 18 [ril .' ..:\ 1]: \\ mfi iii -'/J q