IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12788 OF 2026 Between: '1 44 yrs, Occ. Coolie, R/o PG Tanda, Maryala, . Daravath Ravi, s/o Badru, Aged Nalgonda. 3'1 yrs, Occ. Coolie, Fl/o PG Tanda, 2. Daravath Narsimha, s/o Ramulu, Aged Maryala, Nalgonda. Rl/o H. No.1- 3. Daravath Mana, s/o Dharavath Jethya, Aged 51 yrs, Occ. Coolie, 77, Pilli Gundla Thanda, Maryala, Bommalaramaram, Nalgonda. 4. Ellenki Veeran Kumar @ Yellenki Viran Kumar, S/o. Badraiah, Age. 46 Years, Occ. Business, Ri/o. H.No.B-4- 600/1 , Ganesh Nagar, Karimnagar District. Ri./o 5. Chintha Sadanandam, s/o Chinta Mondaiah, Aged 46 yrs, Occ. Business, H. No.2-65, Pothareddypeta, Huzurabad, Karimnagar. ...Petitioner/Accused- 1 to 5 AND '1 Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad . The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., P.S. Koyyur, Jayashankar Bhupalapalli District. Respondent 2. Endrala Mallesham, S/o. Komuraiah, Age. Unknown, Occ. Deputy Tahsildar (Civil Supplies), Ri"/o. Kuchanapalli Village, Husnabad Mandal, Siddipet District. ...RespondenUDefacto Complainant

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the clrcumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to C.C. No.1608 OF 2022 on the file of the I Addl. Junior civil Judge cum lAddl. Judicial Magistrate of First class (Juvenile) court, Jayashankar Bhupalapally against the Petitioners/Accused No.1-5 and quash the same. t.A. NO: 10F 2026 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 grant stay of all further proceedings in C.C. No.1608 OF 2022 on the file of the Hon,ble I Addl. Junior civil Judge cum I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First class (Juvenile) Court, Jayashankar Bhupalapally including appearance of the Petitioners/Accused No.1-5 till the disposal of the Criminal Petition in the interest of the justice. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr ANUGANTI PRANEETH, Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA, the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of respondent No.' and None appeared for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER E&6EEEaH@!7 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.12788 OF 2026 D*e:07.08.2026 Between: Daravath Ravi and 4 others

..Petitioners AND The State ofTelangana and another ...Respondents ORDER This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1608 of 2022 on the hle of the I Additional Junior Civil judge-cum-l Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class (Juvenile) Court, Jayashankar Bhupalapally, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.l to 5 for the offences punishable under Section 420 oflPC and Section 7 ofthe Essentiai Commodities Act, i955 (for short 'EC Act'). 2. Heard Mr.Anuganti Praneeth, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No. 1 -l' -E 2 petitioners/accused nos.13. The specific allegation against the to 5 is that they have procured PDS rice from the treneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 07.03.2018, the c f PDS rice.petitioners were found in possession of 34 Quintals

4. Leamed counsel for the petitioners would submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary, aileging that the dce was procured deceptively or with a criminai 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 Cr1.P.Nos.5709 of 2019 and 3349 of 2015, while considering the same situation, categorically observed that the offences allegerl against the petitioners therein couldnot be continued and accordingly quashed the proceedings. The petitioners are also entitled to :he same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against tt e petitioners 5. The learned Additionai Public Prosecutor subrnits that as per prosecution, the offences said to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Section 7 ofthe 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 rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer. 7. A Coordinate Bench of this Courr in Crl.p.No.7Z27 of 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that:

"There is no ayerment indicating thal the petitioner in any wuy deceptively induced the beneficiaries to part hith the supptied pDS rice or the beneficiary entrusted the PDS rice purchased by them with the petitioner and they dishonestly misuppropriated or converted to their own use or used it in violation of a lawful direction or contrqct. In the absence of essential factors, on the fuce of prctsecution, this Court finds it to be dft cdse to exercise thejurisdiction under Section 52g ofBNSS, 2023. Thus, continudnce ofproceedings (rgainst the petitioner is abuse ofprocess 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 fit case to exercise jurisdiction under Section 52g 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.No.1608 of 2022 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil judge-cum-I Additional Judicial Magistrate First CIass 4 (Juvenile) Court, Jayashankar Bhupalapally, against the petitioners/accused Nos. i to 5, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if an.,, shall stand closed. SD/- B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \ f I SECTION OFFICER To, i 1. The I Addl. Junior civil Judge cum I Addl. Judicial Ma,Jistrate of First class (Juvenile) Court, Jayashankar Bhupalapally (Call for Rec;ords)

2. The Station House Officer, Koyyur police Station, Jayashankar Bhupalapalli District. 3. One CC to Mr. ANUGANTI PRANEETH Advocate [OpU(]l 4. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for tht; State of Tetangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies RC/GNK '1,-l HIGH COURT DATED: 0710812026 /i T AT E . ,.; o F t\t ,y';\ORDER .//,o" 6l rultCRLP.No.12788 ot 2026 L ! [\t J * L Allowing the Criminal Petition ,,),h

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12788 OF 2026 Between: '1 44 yrs, Occ. Coolie, R/o PG Tanda, Maryala, . Daravath Ravi, s/o Badru, Aged Nalgonda. 3'1 yrs, Occ. Coolie, Fl/o PG Tanda, 2. Daravath Narsimha, s/o Ramulu, Aged Maryala, Nalgonda. Rl/o H. No.1- 3. Daravath Mana, s/o Dharavath Jethya, Aged 51 yrs, Occ. Coolie, 77, Pilli Gundla Thanda, Maryala, Bommalaramaram, Nalgonda. 4. Ellenki Veeran Kumar @ Yellenki Viran Kumar, S/o. Badraiah, Age. 46 Years, Occ. Business, Ri/o. H.No.B-4- 600/1 , Ganesh Nagar, Karimnagar District. Ri./o 5. Chintha Sadanandam, s/o Chinta Mondaiah, Aged 46 yrs, Occ. Business, H. No.2-65, Pothareddypeta, Huzurabad, Karimnagar. ...Petitioner/Accused- 1 to 5 AND '1 Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad . The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., P.S. Koyyur, Jayashankar Bhupalapalli District. Respondent 2. Endrala Mallesham, S/o. Komuraiah, Age. Unknown, Occ. Deputy Tahsildar (Civil Supplies), Ri"/o. Kuchanapalli Village, Husnabad Mandal, Siddipet District. ...RespondenUDefacto Complainant

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the clrcumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to C.C. No.1608 OF 2022 on the file of the I Addl. Junior civil Judge cum lAddl. Judicial Magistrate of First class (Juvenile) court, Jayashankar Bhupalapally against the Petitioners/Accused No.1-5 and quash the same. t.A. NO: 10F 2026 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 grant stay of all further proceedings in C.C. No.1608 OF 2022 on the file of the Hon,ble I Addl. Junior civil Judge cum I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First class (Juvenile) Court, Jayashankar Bhupalapally including appearance of the Petitioners/Accused No.1-5 till the disposal of the Criminal Petition in the interest of the justice. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr ANUGANTI PRANEETH, Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA, the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of respondent No.' and None appeared for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER E&6EEEaH@!7 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.12788 OF 2026 D*e:07.08.2026 Between: Daravath Ravi and 4 others

..Petitioners AND The State ofTelangana and another ...Respondents ORDER This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1608 of 2022 on the hle of the I Additional Junior Civil judge-cum-l Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class (Juvenile) Court, Jayashankar Bhupalapally, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.l to 5 for the offences punishable under Section 420 oflPC and Section 7 ofthe Essentiai Commodities Act, i955 (for short 'EC Act'). 2. Heard Mr.Anuganti Praneeth, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No. 1 -l' -E 2 petitioners/accused nos.13. The specific allegation against the to 5 is that they have procured PDS rice from the treneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 07.03.2018, the c f PDS rice.petitioners were found in possession of 34 Quintals

4. Leamed counsel for the petitioners would submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary, aileging that the dce was procured deceptively or with a criminai 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 Cr1.P.Nos.5709 of 2019 and 3349 of 2015, while considering the same situation, categorically observed that the offences allegerl against the petitioners therein couldnot be continued and accordingly quashed the proceedings. The petitioners are also entitled to :he same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against tt e petitioners 5. The learned Additionai Public Prosecutor subrnits that as per prosecution, the offences said to have been committed by the petitioners is cheating and violation of Section 7 ofthe 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 rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer. 7. A Coordinate Bench of this Courr in Crl.p.No.7Z27 of 2025 has considered the identical facts and observed that:

"There is no ayerment indicating thal the petitioner in any wuy deceptively induced the beneficiaries to part hith the supptied pDS rice or the beneficiary entrusted the PDS rice purchased by them with the petitioner and they dishonestly misuppropriated or converted to their own use or used it in violation of a lawful direction or contrqct. In the absence of essential factors, on the fuce of prctsecution, this Court finds it to be dft cdse to exercise thejurisdiction under Section 52g ofBNSS, 2023. Thus, continudnce ofproceedings (rgainst the petitioner is abuse ofprocess 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 fit case to exercise jurisdiction under Section 52g 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.No.1608 of 2022 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil judge-cum-I Additional Judicial Magistrate First CIass 4 (Juvenile) Court, Jayashankar Bhupalapally, against the petitioners/accused Nos. i to 5, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if an.,, shall stand closed. SD/- B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \ f I SECTION OFFICER To, i 1. The I Addl. Junior civil Judge cum I Addl. Judicial Ma,Jistrate of First class (Juvenile) Court, Jayashankar Bhupalapally (Call for Rec;ords)

2. The Station House Officer, Koyyur police Station, Jayashankar Bhupalapalli District. 3. One CC to Mr. ANUGANTI PRANEETH Advocate [OpU(]l 4. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High Court for tht; State of Tetangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies RC/GNK '1,-l HIGH COURT DATED: 0710812026 /i T AT E . ,.; o F t\t ,y';\ORDER .//,o" 6l rultCRLP.No.12788 ot 2026 L ! [\t J * L Allowing the Criminal Petition ,,),h