[ 3303 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD N/ONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITtoN NO: 13971 OF 2026 Between: A1- Kallem Upendhar reddy, s/o.sathireddy, age: 35 years, caste Reddy, occ: Business, R/o. H.NO. 4-7-184 prakash nagar, Khammam,Khammam Dist. (Accused in CC.No.635 ot 2O2S) ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its public prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, at Hyderabad. (coMPLAtNANT) 2 Sri lt,4echu venkateswarlu,( Deputy tasrldha(DT), S/o. lVallaiah, age 53 years, caste koya, Occ. Govt. official Non-Gezetted, civil supplres ofiiceilOf;, Khammam, Urban, Khammam Dist. (DEFACTO COMPLAINANT) RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated rn the l\,4emorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the impugned in c.c.No.635of 2025, on the filing of the lil Additional junior civil Judge Cum lll Additional Judicial Magistrate lClass at Khammam. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2026

PetitonunderSeclion528ofBNSS.prayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin lhe I\,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High CoL rt may be pleased to rTrant interim stay order of all further proceedings in c.c.No.635 of 2025, On the filing of '.he lll Additional Junior Civil Judge Cum lll Additional Judicial l\4agistrate 1't Class at (hammanr. including appearance and attendance of the petitioners/Accused pending lisposal of the above Criminal petition ThisPetitioncomingonforhearing,uponperusingthel\'4emorandumofGrounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri R Y L N Acharyulu, Advocate for the Petit oner and Sri. Jithender Rao veeramalla, the Addltional Public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana on behalf of the Respondent No.1 ard None appeared for Respondent no.2 The Court made the following:ORDER ITIT IN THE HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA ATHYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITTONNo.13971 of2026 Date:31.08.2026 Between: Kallem Upendhar Reddy ...Petitioner AND The State of Telangana and another ...Respondents ORDER This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.63 5 of 2025 on the hle of the leamed III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Khammam.

2. Heard Mr.Acharyulu Rompicharla Y.L.N., ieamed counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Pubiic Prosecutor for respondent No.1. 3. The specific allegation against the petitioner/accused is that he has procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 05.02.2025, the petitioner was found in possession of 33 quintals of PDS rice 4. Leamed counsel for the petitioner wouid submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary, a|leging that the - 2 andrice was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent charging the petrtioner for prosecution is untenable and improper' The allegations, even taken at his face value cannot be sustained Crl P No'5709 ofagainst the petitioner'. Fufther, thls Court, in 2019, while considering the same situation, categoriczrlly observed that the offences alleged against the petitioners therein could not be continued and accordingly quashed the proceedings l-he petitioner is also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings aga rnst the petitioner. .fhe learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that as per 5. the prosecution, the off-cnces said to have been comnlitted by pelitioner is cheating and violation of Section 7 of the EC Act and requested to pass appropriate orders.

EC Act contemplate thal any person 6. Section 7 of the contravenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential cornmodities, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioner has procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries after suppll, from the dealer 7 Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No 7227 of 2025 . A has considered the identical facts and obserwed that: -z \) "Ihere is no dverment indicating thaf the petitioner in any way deceptively induced the beneJiciaries to part with the supplied. pDS rice or the beneJlciary entrusted the pDS rice purchased iy them with the petitioner and they dishonestly misappropiqted or co,nverted k; their own use or used it in vblation ofa lawful tlirection or contract. ln the absence of essentiol fqctors, on the face of prosecution, fhis Court finds it to be afit case to exercise thejurisdiction under Section 52g ofBNSS, 2023- Thus, continuance of proceedings against the petition"ri, obur" 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 petitioner herein.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.635 of 2025 on the file of rhe leamed III Additional Junior civil Judge-cum-Ill Additionar Judicial First Class Magistrate at Khammam, against the petitioner, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed SD/- P.C.SULEKHA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To 1 The lll Additionar Junior civir Judge-cum- I Additionar Judiciar First Class lt4agistrate at Khammam. 2. The Station House Officer, Khammam lll town Police Station, Khammam. at Prosecutor, Higtr court for the State of Telangana. 3 Two CCs to Public Hyde rabad IOUTI R Y L N Acharyulu, Advocate IOPUC] 4 One CC to SRI Tlvo CD Copres Ity, 5. HIGH COURT DATED: 3110812026 91 ;iTE O F Hr ?i:t t d t ORDER 11 I.}E CRLP.No.13971 of 2026 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION g I lI t. c\ ,;\

[ 3303 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD N/ONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITtoN NO: 13971 OF 2026 Between: A1- Kallem Upendhar reddy, s/o.sathireddy, age: 35 years, caste Reddy, occ: Business, R/o. H.NO. 4-7-184 prakash nagar, Khammam,Khammam Dist. (Accused in CC.No.635 ot 2O2S) ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its public prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, at Hyderabad. (coMPLAtNANT) 2 Sri lt,4echu venkateswarlu,( Deputy tasrldha(DT), S/o. lVallaiah, age 53 years, caste koya, Occ. Govt. official Non-Gezetted, civil supplres ofiiceilOf;, Khammam, Urban, Khammam Dist. (DEFACTO COMPLAINANT) RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated rn the l\,4emorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the impugned in c.c.No.635of 2025, on the filing of the lil Additional junior civil Judge Cum lll Additional Judicial Magistrate lClass at Khammam. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2026

PetitonunderSeclion528ofBNSS.prayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin lhe I\,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High CoL rt may be pleased to rTrant interim stay order of all further proceedings in c.c.No.635 of 2025, On the filing of '.he lll Additional Junior Civil Judge Cum lll Additional Judicial l\4agistrate 1't Class at (hammanr. including appearance and attendance of the petitioners/Accused pending lisposal of the above Criminal petition ThisPetitioncomingonforhearing,uponperusingthel\'4emorandumofGrounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri R Y L N Acharyulu, Advocate for the Petit oner and Sri. Jithender Rao veeramalla, the Addltional Public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana on behalf of the Respondent No.1 ard None appeared for Respondent no.2 The Court made the following:ORDER ITIT IN THE HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA ATHYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITTONNo.13971 of2026 Date:31.08.2026 Between: Kallem Upendhar Reddy ...Petitioner AND The State of Telangana and another ...Respondents ORDER This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.63 5 of 2025 on the hle of the leamed III Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Khammam.

2. Heard Mr.Acharyulu Rompicharla Y.L.N., ieamed counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Pubiic Prosecutor for respondent No.1. 3. The specific allegation against the petitioner/accused is that he has procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate to sell the same for profit and on 05.02.2025, the petitioner was found in possession of 33 quintals of PDS rice 4. Leamed counsel for the petitioner wouid submit that without there being any complaint from any beneficiary, a|leging that the - 2 andrice was procured deceptively or with a criminal intent charging the petrtioner for prosecution is untenable and improper' The allegations, even taken at his face value cannot be sustained Crl P No'5709 ofagainst the petitioner'. Fufther, thls Court, in 2019, while considering the same situation, categoriczrlly observed that the offences alleged against the petitioners therein could not be continued and accordingly quashed the proceedings l-he petitioner is also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings aga rnst the petitioner. .fhe learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that as per 5. the prosecution, the off-cnces said to have been comnlitted by pelitioner is cheating and violation of Section 7 of the EC Act and requested to pass appropriate orders.

EC Act contemplate thal any person 6. Section 7 of the contravenes with the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential cornmodities, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioner has procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries after suppll, from the dealer 7 Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No 7227 of 2025 . A has considered the identical facts and obserwed that: -z \) "Ihere is no dverment indicating thaf the petitioner in any way deceptively induced the beneJiciaries to part with the supplied. pDS rice or the beneJlciary entrusted the pDS rice purchased iy them with the petitioner and they dishonestly misappropiqted or co,nverted k; their own use or used it in vblation ofa lawful tlirection or contract. ln the absence of essentiol fqctors, on the face of prosecution, fhis Court finds it to be afit case to exercise thejurisdiction under Section 52g ofBNSS, 2023- Thus, continuance of proceedings against the petition"ri, obur" 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 petitioner herein.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.635 of 2025 on the file of rhe leamed III Additional Junior civil Judge-cum-Ill Additionar Judicial First Class Magistrate at Khammam, against the petitioner, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed SD/- P.C.SULEKHA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To 1 The lll Additionar Junior civir Judge-cum- I Additionar Judiciar First Class lt4agistrate at Khammam. 2. The Station House Officer, Khammam lll town Police Station, Khammam. at Prosecutor, Higtr court for the State of Telangana. 3 Two CCs to Public Hyde rabad IOUTI R Y L N Acharyulu, Advocate IOPUC] 4 One CC to SRI Tlvo CD Copres Ity, 5. HIGH COURT DATED: 3110812026 91 ;iTE O F Hr ?i:t t d t ORDER 11 I.}E CRLP.No.13971 of 2026 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION g I lI t. c\ ,;\