Abdul Sattar Alias Shaik Sattar, v. The State Of Telangana
134441 rN THE HlcH couRT FoR THE srATE oF rElerueera AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITIO NO: '14745 OF 2025 Between:
1. Abdul Sattar alias Shaik Sattar,, S/o. AMul lGdeer Shaik, Age. 38 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No. 3-6-360/1, Chilkuri Laxmi Nagar, Adilabad District 504001.
2. Farhan alias Mohammad Farhan Mohammad Yusaf Sheikh,, S/o. Mohammad Yusuf Sheikh, Age. 33 years Occ. Business, Rio. Akhanda road, Rani Laxmibai Ward, Pandharakawada Yavatmal, Maharashtra 445302 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(Sl AND The State of Telangana, rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad MD Ai-eem, C/o. Not Known, Age. 61 years, Occ. Police officer, Rl/o. Adilabad Rural, Adilabad Distr'tct 50ut001 ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in Crime No. 316 ol 2025 on the file of Rural Police Station, Adilabad District, against the petitioners/Accused No. 3 and l.A. NO: 2OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased stay all further proceedings in Crime No. 316 ot 2O25 on the file of Rural Police Station, Adilabad District.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri SOMA RAVI KIRAN REDDY ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. Jithender Rao Veeramalla the Additional Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2;
.--..--='
The Court ntade the following: ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA ORDER:
This Criminal petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.3 & 4 under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS, 2023'l seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.316 of 2025 on the file of Adilabad Rural Police Station, Adilabad District, registered for the offences under Sections 318(4) of BNS and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
2. Heard Sri Soma Ravi Kiran Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the specific allegation against the petitioner is that they have procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 03.10.2025 at about 15.00 hrs., the petitioners were found in possession of 3.50 quintals of PDS rice.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary, alleging that the rice was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent and charging the petitioners for prosecution is untenable and improper
Efo) The allegirtions on their face value cannot be sustained against the petitionerr;. Further, this Court in Crl.P.Nos.5709 of 2019 and 33493 of 2015 while considering the same situation, categorically observed that the c,ffences alleged against the petitioners therein cannot be continued and quashed the proceedings. The petitioners are also entitled tc the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners
5. ']-he learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that as per prosecution, the offence said to have been committed by the petitioner is cheating and violation of Sections 7 and 8 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and requested to pass appropriate orders.
6. Perused the material available on record
7. ;Sections 7 and 8 of the Essential Commodities 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.
8. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P. No.7227 of 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that
i "There is no averment indicating that the petitioners in any way deceptively induced the beneficiaries to part with the supplied PDS rice 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 laMul direction or contract. ln the absence of essential factors, on the face of prosecution, this Court finds it to be a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. Thus, continuance of proceedings against the petitioners is abuse of process of law."
9. 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 petitioners herein.
10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in FIR No.316 ot 2025 on the file of Adilabad Rural Police Station, Adilabad District, against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Mi.scellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/.M. NAGAM ASSISTANT //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 't. The Special Judicial First Ctass Magistrate(pcR) at Aditabad, Adilabad District
2. The SHO Adilabad Rural Police Station, Aditabad District.
3. One CC to SRl. SOMA RAVI KIRAN REDDY Advocate [OpUCl
4. Two Copies to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]
HIGH COURT DATED:1211112025 HESfr{ ( 3 0g FEB ?ra6 I CRLP.No.14745 ot 2025 ..j:j..:..:i.
- CRIMINAL PEITITION IS ALLOWED AND THE PROCEDINGS IN FIR NO. 316 OF 2025 ARE HEREBY QUASHED.
q