Allowed

Mohd. Jameel v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC5 Jul 2021CRLP/155/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tobacco-product prosecutions concerned transportation, possession, storage, sale and purchase of allegedly banned products. The Court allowed all petitions and quashed the criminal proceedings. It directed police to return seized property in the crime-stage matters after verification, while permitting applications to Magistrates for return of property in calendar cases.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings quashed; police directed to return seized property after verification in crime-stage matters; liberty to seek return from Magistrates in calendar cases.

Mohd. Jameel Vs The State of Telangana and another — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA}

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

N,4ONDAY, THE^{FIFTH DAY OF JULY} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY ONE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN}

¶6

153 155 162&5^{826 0F 20} AND 3498³⁵⁰⁰ CRI MINAL PETIT^{ION Nos:15} J s09. 35 't4.37^{68. 3879. 4046 . 4070,4077,} 4098, 4099,41^{00,4102, 4110,4119,41 40.} 4141 4151^{41574178418241} 7 4194 42 b 4 30 4 7 4249 42 I 42 8⁴²⁶² 4277 4361 4405^{441545424612461546224632} 4 4681 4727⁴⁷⁷ &

¶7

4825 0 F 2021

¶8

CRIMI NAL^{PETITIO NNo | 152 oF 2020}

¶9

Between:

¶10

Mohd'JameelAhmed,S/o.AkberAli,Agedabout54years,occ.Business, R/o.L.B. Nagar, warangal'

¶11

...petitioner/Accused^No.2

¶12

ANO

¶13

The State^{of Telangana,representedby the PublicProsecutor'High Court' at} Hyderabad. F,^r:^^ c.^ri^^ rh+67.r.!r r

¶14

z. slrprt^{Kumar K, Assistant sub-lnspector of Police, PoliceStation lntezargunl,} warangal commissionerate' ...RespondenuDe-facto^complainant

¶15

PetitionunderSectlon4S2olCr.P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated intheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminplPetition,theHighCourtmaybepleased toCallfortherecordsandquashtheproceedingsagainstthePetitioner/Accused No.2inC.C,No.35l5of20lgintheCourtoftheFirstAdditionalJudicialFirstClass Magistrate, at^{Warangal, in the interestof justice'}

¶16

l.A. NO: 1OF 2020

¶17

PetitionunderSection4B2ofCr.P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated inthelv]emorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighcourtmaybepleased to stay all further^{proceedings including appearanceagainstthe Petitioner/Accused} No.2inCC,No,35l5of20lgintheCourtoftheFirstAdditionalJudicialFirstClass Magistrate, at^{Warangal, pending disposal of the aboveCriminal Petition'}

¶18

This Petition coming^{on for hearing,uponperusing the Memorandumof} Grounds of Criminal^{Petitionand upon hearing the arguments of Sri M AK'} lr,4ukheed,AdvocateforthePetitionerandthePublicProsecutoronbehalfofthe Respondents.

¶19

-c'\ -

¶20

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 153 OF 2020

¶21

Betwee n:

¶22

Purushotham Mishra, S/o. Nathumal Mishra, Aged about 46 years, Occ. Business, FUo H.No.'14-11-717, Jenshi Chouraha, Mangalhat, Hyderabad.

¶23

...Petitione r/Acc used No.2

¶24

AND

¶25

The State of Telangana, represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶26

Sri Venkata Swamy, Sub-lnspector of Police, Police Station l\rlusheerabad, Hyderabad'

¶27

... RespondenuDe-facto complainant

¶28

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records and quash the proceedings against the Petitioner/Accu sed No.2 in C.C.No.2724 of 2019 on the file of XVll Additional Chief Metropotitan Magistrate, at Hyderabad, in the interest of justice.

¶29

l.A. NO: 1OF 2020

¶30

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased lo stay all further proceedings including appearance against the Petitio ne r/Accused No.2 in C.C.No.2724 of 2019 on the file of XVll Additional Chief Metropotiran lvlagistrate, at Hyderabad, pending disposal of the above Criminal petition.

¶31

This Petition coming on for hearing,.up-on perusing the l/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upori hearing the arguments of Sri M. A. K. Mukheed, Advocate for the Petitioner and the^public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶32

CRIM INAL PETITION N O: 155 OF 2020

¶33

Between;

¶34

Mohd. Jameel, S/o. Akber Ali, Aged about 54 years, Occ. Business, R/o. L.B. Nagar, Warangal.

¶35

..Petitioner/Accused No.3

¶36

AND

¶37

The State of Telangana, represented by the^{public prosecutor,} High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶38

Ch. Yadagiri, Assistant Sub-lnspector of Police, police Station lntezargunj, Warangal Com m iss io ne rate.

¶39

...RespondenUComplainant

¶40

Petition under section 482 ol cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in lhe Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to call for the records and quash the proceedings against the petitioner/Accused

¶41

-3-

¶42

No,3 in C.C.No.351B of 20'19 in the Court of the First Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Warangal, in the interest of^justice.

¶43

A. NO: 1 OF 2020

¶44

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lt4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance against the Petitioner/Accused No.3 in C.C.No.3518 of 2019 in the Court of the First Additional Judicial First Class [,4agistrate, at Warangal, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶45

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M. A. K. Mukheed, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶46

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 162 OF 2020

¶47

Betwee n :

¶48

Purushotham lvlishra, Sio. Nathumal Mishra, Aged about 46^years, Occ.Business, Rt/o. H No. 14-11-717, Jenshi Chouraha, Mangalhat, Hyderabad. ... Petitione r/Accused No.2

¶49

AND

¶50

The State of Telangana, represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶51

Sri S. Sai Kiran, Sub-lnspector of Police, Police Station Bowenpally, Hyderabad. ,,^{.,.*BespondenUDe'facto Complainant}

¶52

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records and quash the proceedings against the Petitio ner/Accused No.5 in C.C.No .4737 ol 2018 on the file of XI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, at Secunderabad, in the interest of justice.

¶53

l.A. NO: I OF 2020

¶54

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P .C praying that in the circumstances stated in the i,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the filing of certified copy of C.C.No.4737 of 2018 on the file of Xl Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, at Secunderabad in the above Criminal Petition, pending disposal of the main Criminal Petition.

¶55

l.A. NO: 2OF 2020

¶56

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance against the Petitioner No.5

¶57

-+-

¶58

in/Accused C.C.No.4737 of 2018 on the file of Xl Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, at Secunderabad, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶59

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M. A. K. lVlukheed, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶60

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5826 OF 2020

¶61

Between:

¶62

Bachala Subash, S/o. Rajaiah, Age. 35 years, Occ. Labour, R/o. Lingapur Village, Dandepally Mandal, [,4ancherial District, Telangana.

¶63

Yerra Naresh, S/o. Prabhakar, Age 33 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Jannaram Village, Mancherial District, Telangana.

¶64

...Petitioners/Accused No.'t and 2

¶65

AND

¶66

The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶67

The Sub-lnspector of Police, Police Station Dharmapuri, Jagitial District, Telangana.

¶68

..,Respondents

¶69

Petition under Section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash all the proceedings against the Petitioners / accused No..1 and 2 in c.c.No.1124 of 2o2o on the file of the Leame.q lgeciat Magistrate ll class at Jagitial is crime No.29B of 2020 dated 11.09.2b20 of police station Dharmapuri, Jagitial District under Sections 1BB,27O and 273 of lpC.

¶70

(Prayer amended as per court order dated. in l.A.No.3 of 2o2o in criminal Petition.5826 of 2020)

¶71

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2020

¶72

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all the proceedings against the petitioners / accused No.1 and 2 in c.c. No.1'124 of 2020 on the file of the Learned special Magistrate ll class at Jagitial District under sections 188, 270 and, 223 of lpc, during the pendency of this euash Petition.

¶73

(Prayer amended as per court order dated. in LA.No.3 of 2o2o in criminal Petition.5826 ot 2020)

¶74

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the IVemorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri Boggula Raju,

¶75

Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶76

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3498 OF 2021

¶77

Between:

¶78

1, Md. Yousuf, Sio. Hussain, Aged about 39 years, Occ. Business, Shivajinagar, Devarakonda Town, Nalgonda District.

¶79

Syed Khader, S/o. Chand, Aged about 43 years, Occ. Business, Rt/o. H.No. 1199, Gokul Nagar Colony, lbrahimpatnam Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

¶80

...petitioner/Accused No.1 to 2

¶81

AND

¶82

The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶83

V. Narayaba Reddy, Sl of Police, Devarakonda Police Station, Devarakonda Town, Nalgonda District.

¶84

.RespondenUComplainant

¶85

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the [,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to quash to proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.216 ol 2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Devarakonda, Nalgonda District, registered Sec 273,420 lPC, against the petitioners.

¶86

l.A. NO: 1OF 2021

¶87

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.PB'pfaylnQ that in the circumstances stated in the lt4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay of all further proceedings of the petitioners in the C.C.No.216 of 2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Devarakonda, Nalgonda District, registered Sec 273,420 lPC, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶88

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶89

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3500 OF 2021

¶90

Between:

¶91

Ramavath Ravi, S/o. Sura, Aged about 25 years, Occ. Car Driver, R/o,Naidupalem Village, Anumula @ Haliya Mandal, Present Ravinder Nagar of lv4iryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District.

¶92

l\4nchi Lakshamaiah, S/o. Nagaiah, Aged about 31 years, Occ. Aniyan Business, R/o. Gurajala Village and Mandal, Guntur District.

¶93

Syed Khader, S/o. Chand, Aged about 43 years, Occ. Business, RJo. H.No. 111'1 7, Kumari Basti, lbrahimpatnam Village and ltrlandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶94

-6-

¶95

Kore Satyanarayana @ Satyam, S/o. Venkata Swamy, Aged about 39 years, Occ. Pan Shop, Rl/o. Karampoodi Village and Mandal, Guntur District. ...Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 4

¶96

AND

¶97

The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Coud for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶98

D. Srinivasa Reddy, lnspector of Police, lt/iryalguda ll Town Police Station. ... Respondents/Com plaina nt

¶99

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumslances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.963 ol 2019 on the of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Miryalguda, Nalgonda District, registered Sec.273, 420 lPC, sec 20(2) of COTP Act. against the petitioners.

¶100

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶101

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay of all further proceedings of the petitioners in C.C.No.963 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Miryalguda, Nalgonda District, registered Sec. 273,420 lPC, sec 2O(2) o't COTP Act pending disposal of the above Criminal petition.

¶102

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri praveen Kumar Veerjala, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public^prosecutor on behalf of the

¶103

CRIMINAL PETITION N O: 3509 OF 2021

¶104

Between:

¶105

Mashamoni Kishan, S/o. Danaia, Aged about 48 years, Occ. Busibess, Fl/o.H.No. 10-128 o'f Yadava basti, lbrahimpatnam Village and lrr'landal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶106

Syed Khader, S/o. Chand, Aged about 43 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No, 1199, Gokul Nagar Colony, Ibrahimpatnam Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶107

.,. Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 2

¶108

AND

¶109

The State of Telangana, represented by its Public prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶110

2 A. Kdshnaiah, lnspector of Police, lbrahimpatnam police Station Rachakonda. ...Respondents/Compla in a nt

¶111

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioners c.c.No.452 of 2o2o on the file of the XXV Metropolitan lvlagistrate Cyberabad, at lbrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District, registered Sec.188, 27O,273 lPC, sec 2O(2) ol COTp Act, and 3 of Epidemic

¶112

--7 -

¶113

act 1897 and Section 51(b) of Disaster^{Management Act 2005, againstthe} petitioners.

¶114

l,A. NO: 2OF 2021

¶115

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the^{circumstances stated} in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the^{HighCourt may be pleased} to stay of all further^proceedings of the^{petitioners in c.c.No.452 of 2020 on the file} of the XXV Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad, at^{lbrahimpatnam,Ranga Reddy} District, registered Sec.1BB, 270,273^{lPC, sec 20(2)of COTP Act, and 3 of Epidemic} act 1897 and Section 51(b) of Disaster^{ManagementAct 2005 pending disposal of} the above Criminal Petition.

¶116

This Petition coming on for hearing,^{upon perusing the Memorandum of} Grounds of criminal Petition and^{upon hearingthe argumentsof Sri Praveen Kumar} Veerjala, Advocate for the Petitioners^{and the Public Prosecutoron behalfof the} Respondents.

¶117

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3514 OF 202'l

¶118

Betwee n

¶119

Syed Khader, S/o. Chand, Aged about^{43 years' Occ. Business, PJo.H.No.11-} gg, Gotut Nagar Colony, lbrahimpatnam Village and Mandal' Ranga Reddy District.

¶120

Mareno George@ Ashok, S/o.^{Prabhakar,Aged about 38 years, Occ. Driver,} R/o. Gate of lt4alenav Village and Mandal,^{Bidar District of Karnataka State.}

¶121

Syed Rasheed, S/o. Syed Kadheer,^{Age-d about 36 years,Occ. Business,} R/o.H,No, 11-99, Gokul Nagar Gblony,^{-lbrahimpatnam Village andMandal,} Ranga Reddy District.

¶122

Mohlmmed Shafl, S/o. Raheem,^{Aged about 26 years, Occ. Business, R/o.H.No.} 1 1-99, Gokul Nagar Colony, lbrahimpatnam^{Villageand Mandal, RangaReddy} District.

¶123

5, Syed Chand, S/o. Syed Khader, Aged^{about 65 years, Occ. Business,RJo' H No.} 1 1-99, Gokul Nagar Colony, lbrahimpatnam^{Villageand Mandal' RangaReddy} District.

¶124

Mohammed Arif, S/o. Sadaq, Aged about^{32 years,Occ. Business, Fl/o. H.No.} 1 1-99, Gokul Nagar Colony, lbrahimpatnam^{Villageand Mandal, RangaReddy} District.

¶125

lr,4arino Swamy Das, S/o. Prabhakar, Aged about^{37 years, Occ. Lorry Driver,} R/o. Gate of Malenav Village and Mandal,^{Bidar District of Karnataka State.}

¶126

Mohammed Aziz @ Azzu, Slo. Mahammed^{Hafeez,Aged about 32 years,} Occ.Driver, F/o. Old Police Station, lbrahimpatnam^{Villageand Mandal,Ranga} Reddy District

¶127

...petitioners/Accused Nos.1^to I

¶128

AND

¶129

The State of Telangana, represented by^{its Public Prosecutor High Court for the} State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶130

P. Guruva Reddy, lnspector of^{Police,lbrahimpatnam Police Station}

¶131

Rachakonda'

¶132

...Respondents/com^plainant

¶133

*z-

¶134

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No. 632 of 20i9 on the file of the XXV Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad, at lbrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District, registered Sec.188, 270,273,420 lPC, sec 20(2) of COTp Act, against the petitioners.

¶135

l.A.No.2 of 2021:

¶136

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings of the Petitioners in c.c.No.632 of 2019 on the file of the XXV Metropolitan lvlagistrate Cyberabad at lbrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District, registered Sec.1BB, 27O,273,420 tPC, sec 20 (2) of COTp Act pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶137

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri praveen Kumar Veerjala, Advocate for the Petitioners and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶138

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3768 OF 2021

¶139

Between:

¶140

lyrgg,^{Qoverdhan, S/o. LateLing.apnq.,-Agedabout 52 years,Occ. Driver,} R/o.Utnoor Village and Mandal, ROita6Ea OBtiict. ...Petitioner/Accused AND

¶141

1 . Circle lnspector of Police, Toopran police Station, Medak District.

¶142

...RespondenUComplainant 2. The State of Telangana, represented by its public prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶143

...Responde nUCom pla inant

¶144

Petition under section 482 Read with 451 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash all further proceedings against the petitioners in crime No. 217 of 2020 on the file of the Manoharabad police station, Medak District in the circumstances mentioned above to meet the ends of justice.

¶145

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶146

Petition under Section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances slated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.1 to return material Amber Tobacco worth of Rs 15,00,000 I and Vehicle Eicher DCM bearing No TS O1UA 6498. Engine No

¶147

-9

¶148

8413CDGB067145, Chassis No. MC2FBHRCOGB 113022 seized by the 1st Respondent in Crime No 2'17 of 2020 on the file of the Manoharabad Police station, Medak District pending disposal of the main case.

¶149

This Petltion coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K. Surender, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶150

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3879 OF 2021

¶151

Betwee n:

¶152

Mohammed Shakir, S/o. Mohammed Rajak, Aged about 35 years, Occ.Business, R/o. H.No, 5-60, Market Colony, Kaddam, Peddur, Adilabad.

¶153

... Petitioners/Accused

¶154

AND

¶155

The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶156

Kodado Raju, lnspector of Police, Nirmal Police Station Adilabad, Adilabad. ,..Respondents/Complainant

¶157

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the [,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings of the in F.l.R.No. 33 of 2021 on the file lnspector of Poljce, Nirmal Police Station, Adilabad, Adilabad District, registered Sec 270, 273 IPC against the petitioner.

¶158

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶159

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings in F.l.R.No. 33 of 2021 on the file lnspector of Police, Nirmal Police Station Adilabad, Adilabad District, registered Sec. 270, 273 IPC pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶160

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶161

Petition under Section 482 o'f Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the ltlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent forth with release the stock sized F.l.R.No. 33 of 2021 on the file lnspector of Police, Nirmal Police Station Adilabad, Adilabad District, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶162

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶163

*lo -

¶164

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:4046 OF 2021

¶165

Between:

¶166

Endla Raju, S/o. Pochanna, Aged about 34 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Near Limra Masjid, Bhuktapur, Adilabad District.

¶167

Sajid @ Sajidullah Khan, S/o. Azmathullah Khan, Aged about 30 years, Occ.Business, Rl/o. H.No. 3-8-29711, Panjesha Mohalla, Adilabad D jstrict.

¶168

...PetitionersiAccused No.1 and 2

¶169

AND

¶170

The state of relangana, through S.H.o. Adilabad I Town police station, Adirabad District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶171

... Responde nts/Complain ant

¶172

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceeding against the petitioners/accused in crime. No. 78 of 2o2i on the file of P.S., Adilabad lrown Police station, Adilabad District, and consequenily direct the police to return the seized material in crime. No. 78 of 2021 of Adilabad I Town Police Station, Adilabad District.

¶173

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶174

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to dispense with filling of the certified copy of the crime. No. 78 of 2021 on the file of Adilabad lTown Police Station, Adilabad District.

¶175

l.A. NO: 2 OF 20 21

¶176

Petition under Section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to direct the police to return the seized material in crime. No. 78 of 2021 of Adilabad I Town Police Station, Adilabad District to the petitioner, pending disposar of the above Criminal Petition.

¶177

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri Gajanand chakravarthi, Advocate for the petitioners and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶178

CRIMINAL PETITlo N NO: 407 0 0F 2021

¶179

Between:

¶180

Dinde Gnaneshwar, S/o. prakash, Aged about 22 years, Occ. Business R/o.H.No. 14-50, Namdevwada, Nizamabad.

¶181

Durgam Govardhan, S/o. Late Linganna, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Utnoor Locality, Adilabad District.

¶182

...petitioner/Accused No.1 and 2

¶183

AND

¶184

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O. Manoharabad Police Station, Medak District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶185

...Respondents/Complai nant

¶186

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to quash the proceeding against the petitioner/accused in C.C.No. 547 of 2021 on the file of Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate at Gajwel, Medak District,^and consequently direct the court below to return the sized material in C.C.No.^{547 of} 2021 on the file of Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate at Gajwel,^{tr/edak District.}

¶187

LA. NO: 2OF 2021

¶188

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances^stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High^{Court may be pleased} to direct the court below to return the seized material in C.C.No.547^{of 2021 on the} file of Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Gajwel, Medak^District to^the petitioner, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶189

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the^Memorandumof Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of^{Sri Gajanand} Chakravarthi, Advocate for the Petitioners and the^{Public Prosecutoron behalf of the} Respondent.

¶190

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4077 OF 2021

¶191

Between:

¶192

Nidhir Mandal, S/o. Rathan Mandal, Aged about 36^years, Occ.^Buslness, R/o.Villa No.1, Nazrulnagar, Kaghaznagar, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶193

...Petitioner/Accused

¶194

AND

¶195

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O. Easgoan Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad'

¶196

...Respondentsi comprainant

¶197

Petitlon under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to quash the proceeding against the petitioner/accused in Crime. No. 21 of 2021 on the file of PS., Easgoan Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District, and consequently direct the police to return the sized material in Crime. No. 21 of 2021 of Easgoan Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶198

-ro -

¶199

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶200

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the police to return the seized material in Crime No. 21 of 2021 of Easgoan Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District to the petitioner, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶201

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Gajanand chakravarthi, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶202

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4098 OF 20 21

¶203

Between:

¶204

Shaik Shafiq, S/o. Shaik Ahmed, Aged about. 39 years, Occ. Business, Pinjarigutta , Nirmal, Nirmal District. (Owher Hira Pan Store)

¶205

Z. APAy! Yabeen, S/o. Abdul Razaq, Aged about. 35 Years, Occ. Van Driver, Fl/o.Vishwanathpet, Nirmal

¶206

SK Amjad, S/o, SK. Hyder, Aged about. Major, Occ. Labor, Rl/o. Vishwanathpet, Nirmal.

¶207

... Petitione rs/Acc used 1-3

¶208

ANO

¶209

1 Ilre^{Stqtg of Telangana,. represented by its Public prosecutor,High Court for} the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶210

2 The Sub lnspector of Police, Police Station Nirmal To,rvn. Nirmal District

¶211

...RespondenUDefacto Complainant

¶212

Petition under Section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/ accused No. 1 -3 in crime No.1 85 of 2021 of Nirmal rown, Police station, at Nirmal District and consequenily to return the material seized all together with vehicle i.e. Ashok Leyland Van B No. TS18T55876 in crime.No.185 ol 2021 and the same is deposited in the Nirmal rown police Station, at Nirmal District.

¶213

t.A. NO: oF 2021

¶214

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including the appearance of the petitioners/ accused No. 1-3 in Crime No.185 ol 202i of Nirmal Town police Station, at Nirmal.

¶215

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/s p. Radhika, Advocate for the Petitioners and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶216

_l'l- -

¶217

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4099 OF 2021

¶218

Between: Sarkar R/o.Koutala VSanja^y, illage^S/o. and^Sujeeth lvlandal Komrambeem^{Sarkar,Aged about} Asifabad³² District.^{years,Occ. Business,} ...Petitioner/Accused

¶219

AND

¶220

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O. Koutala Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶221

... Responde nts/Compla inant

¶222

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to quash the proceeding against the^{petitioner/accused} in Crime. No. 36 of 2021^on the file of P.S,. Koutala Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District,^and consequently direct the police to return the sized material in Crime No. 36 of 2021^ol Koutala Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶223

l.A. NO: 2OF 2021

¶224

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may^{be pleased} to direct the police to return the seized material in Crime.No. 36 of^{2021 of Koutala} Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District to the^{petitioner, pending} disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶225

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon ,:hearingT" the arguments of Sri Gajanand Chakravarthi, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶226

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4100 OF 2021

¶227

Between:

¶228

Nidhir lt4andal, S/o. Rathan Mandal, Aged about 36 years, Occ. Business, R/o.Villa No.1, Nazrulnagar, Kaghaznagar, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶229

... Petitioner/Accused

¶230

AND

¶231

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O. Easgoan Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶232

...Respondents/Complainant

¶233

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to quash the proceeding against the petitioner/accused in Crime. No. 38 of 2021 on the f ile of P.S., Easgoan Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District, and consequently direct the police to return the sized material in Crime. No. 38 of 2021 of Easgoan Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶234

¶235

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶236

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the police to return the seized material in Crime. No. 3g of 2021 of Easgoan Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District to the petitioner, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶237

¶238

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4102 oF 2021

¶239

Between:

¶240

Manikchan.d, S/o. Dharma Rao, Aged about.34 years, Occ. Driver, Maniknagar, Chinthal, Kukatpally, Telangana.

¶241

...Petitioner

¶242

AND

¶243

The.State of Telangana, represented by the Public prosecutor, Through police Station Kukatpally.

¶244

...RespondenUComplainant

¶245

Petition under Section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the petltione$ -in crime No. 4s5 of 2021, on the file of Police station Kukatpally, cyberabid forthe offences U/s 336, 273, 188, lpc, 5e (i) FSSA.

¶246

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶247

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioner in crime. No. 455 of 2021, on the file of Police station Kukatpally, cyberabad pending dlsposal of the Criminal Petition in the interest of justice.

¶248

LA,. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶249

Petition under section 4g2 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the l-..iigh court may be pleased to direct the court below to return tobacco material and vehicle bearing registration No. TS 08 of 9830 Bolero and seized from the petitioner and deposited in connection with crime No.455 of 2021 , porice station Kukatpaily, cyberabad forthwith immediately pending disposar of the criminal petition in the inrerest of .iustice.

¶250

-\s--

¶251

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Srinivas Reddy Balakisti, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶252

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4110 OF 2021

¶253

Betwee n:

¶254

'1 . Abid Khan, S/o. Ayub Khan, Aged about 30 years, Occ. Driver, R/o. Ameer Nagar, Tijara, Alwar District.

¶255

Aijaj Khan, S/o. Hajar Mohd, Aged about 24 yearc, Occ. Driver, R/o. H.No. 57, Near Main Road, Dhadola, Nagina, Nuh Mewat.

¶256

Vikash Chhabra, S/o. Sundar Lal Chahbara, Aged about 39 years, Occ.Business, R/o. H.No. A-33 Phase-2 Rajeevnagar, Beaumpur, Delhi.

¶257

Saleemulla Khan @ Samiulla Khan @Shamiulla Khan, S/o. Ajmathulla Khan, Aged about 41 years, Occ. Business, PJo. H.No. 3-3-198, Panjesha Colony, Ad ila bad.

¶258

Nazeem Khan @ Nadeem Khan, S/o. Ir/ujeeb Khan, Aged about 25 years, occ.Business, Rr/o. H.No. 4-e-701, Firter bed, .:1,;:li,i""*?ghAt3l5ir?ii-13,,

¶259

AND

¶260

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O. Adilabad Police Station, Adilabad District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶261

...Respondents/Complainant

¶262

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the l,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to case in C.C.No. 509 of 2020 on the flle of Special PCR tt,4obile Court Cum Judicial First-Class Magistrate, at Adilabad, and quash the proceedings in the above C.C.No.509 ot 1020:'

¶263

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶264

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C 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 including appearance of the petitioner in C.C.N0.509 of 2020 on the file of Special PCR Mobile Court Cum Judicial First-Class Magistrate, at Adilabad, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶265

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Gajanand Chakravarthi, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶266

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:4119 OF 2021

¶267

Between:

¶268

I.4d. Akram, S/o. lsmail, Aged about 32 years, Occ. Owner of Akram Traders, R/o. Bhukthapur, Adilabad Locality, Adilabad District.

¶269

Mohammad lVlatheen, S/o. Mohammad Shafi, Aged about 45 years, Occ. Driver, R/o. Karanja, Washim District.

¶270

_ 16_

¶271

Abdul.Sayeed,.S/o..Zairuddin, Aged about3T years, Occ. Driver, R/o. H.No.29- : 444, Karanja, Washim District.

¶272

Shaik Chanal @ Shaik Chand, S/o. Abdul Karim, Aged about 65 years, Occ.Driver, Rli o Ka ranja Washim District.

¶273

...Petitioner/Accused No.1 to 4

¶274

AND

¶275

The State of Telanoa,na, Through S.H.O., Talamadugu police Station, Adilabad, ^' ."" District, representef oy i,uuric F;oailid;,'Fj6ii'corftl nv-ci"LE;;:"'

¶276

... Res pon d e nts/Com plainant

¶277

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to call for the records rerating to case in c.c.No. s12 of 2o2o on the file of speciar PCR Mobile court cum Judiciar Firsrcrass Magistrate, at Adirabad, and quash the proceedings in the above C.C.No. 512 of 2020.

¶278

l.A. NO: 2OF 2021

¶279

Petition under secrion 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to grant stay of a[ further proceedings including appearance of the petitioner in c.c.No. 512 of 2020 on the fire of speciar pcR Mobire court cum Judiciar First class lvragistrate, at Adirabad, pending disposar of the criminar petition.

¶280

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Gajanand chakravarthi, Advocate for the petitioners anijTh6 pubric prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent.

¶281

CRIMINAL PETIT|ON NO: 4140 OF 2021

¶282

Between:

¶283

Dubagunfla poorna , .Chandu@__Chandu,^{S/o. pulla} .^{Rao, Aged 22 years,}

¶284

H.rrro. zs-4-sz7A-'Sli'nJ,ii'Nasar, Jangireoo:/-6uiEm,,iliest

¶285

3SErt,ii.lTi?;,p.".

¶286

2 Mohammed Muieeb. S/o. IUD Khasim,.Aged 58 years, Occ. Driver, Rl/o.H.No.19_ 2- 1 64, Tad ba nd Ba sti, B a had urpuE, f.rea'r-io6:pai[, ii yi era naO O istrict.

¶287

AND

¶288

...petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2

¶289

1 sub lnspector of^porice, Ghatkeshwar porice station, Rachakonda District.

¶290

...RespondenUComplainant

¶291

2 Il#:*o:t'"lansana,^{represented bv its Pubtic prosecutor, Hish courr, at}

¶292

...RespondenUComplainant

¶293

Petition under Section 492 Read with 45.1 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in STC No

¶294

-t?-

¶295

20ol2o2lonthefileoflVAdditionalMetropolitanMagistrate-Cum.lVAdditional Junior Civil Judge,^{at L.B. Nagar, Ranga Reddy District'}

¶296

t.A. NO: 2 OF²⁰²¹

¶297

PetitionunderSection4B2ofCr.P.Cprayingthatintheclrcumstancesstated intheN,4emorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighCourtmaybepleased to direct the^{lV Additional Metropolitan Magistratecum lV AdditionalJunior civil} Judge , Cyberabad,^{at L.B.Nagar to return Material1) Miraj Tobacco 60 bags} 2) Vl Tobacco^{40 bags3) Swagathtobacco (big bags) -03 4) Chaini Khaini-06bags} 5)VimalPanl\ilsala40bags6)NetCashRs5,700/-7)CellPhonel(Ml9Pro)8) BolerovehicleBearingNo.TSOTUFs2lTseizedbythelstRespondentinCrime Nol23of2O2lofGhatkeshwarPoliceStation'RachakondaDistrictpending disposal of^{the main case.}

¶298

This Petition coming^{on for hearing' upon perusing the Memorandumof} Grounds of Criminal^{Petition and upon hearingthe argumentsof M/s C' Sunitha} Kumari,AdvocateforthePetitionersandthePub|icProsecutoronbehalfofthe Respondents.

¶299

CRIMIN AL^{PETITION NO: 4141 0 F 2021}

¶300

Between:

¶301

1, Shaik Mohammed^{lsmail,S/o. Rehmanshya,aged.30 years' occ. Private} Business,^{R/o.Warawatti, Bidar, KarnataKa slale'}

¶302

1. Shaik Gousoddin,^{Wo. Dawoodaged'34 years' Occ' Business'R/o Warawatti'} Bidar, Karnataka^State.

¶303

Shera Ali, S/o^{Rchmanshya,aged '29 years' Occ' Business'RJo' Warawatti'} Bidar, Karnataka^State.

¶304

',.Petitioners

¶305

AND

¶306

The State of Telangana,^{represented by its Public.Prosecutor High Courtof} iijirr'gl;,:i Hvd"ru"ord,'ih16ish^{ioli;d Slation chiraspallv'Sansareddv'} Cyberabad,^Telangana.

¶307

...ResPondent

¶308

PetitionunderSection482ofCr'P'Cprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated intheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition'theHighCourtmaybepleased to^quash the^{proceedingsvide FIR No'45of 2021daled' 23-5-2021} '^Registered U/Sec.270,273,]PC20(2)rtw7(2)COTPAonthefileofSOHofPoliceStation Chiragpally,Sangareddy,Cyberabadasillegal'unconstitutional'contraytolaw' withoutjurisdictionandaSsuchliabletobequashedintheinterestofjusticeby directing the^{police to releasethe Propertyseized i'e} '^{the Lorrybearing No MH 25} t) 7621 and items^i.e., Bl^{big bags and 4 small bags of Khaini packetstotal worth} Rs.27,21,6001^{in pursuanceof the Crime vide FIR No 45 of 2021 forthwith'}

¶309

-lg-

¶310

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶311

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay all further proceedings in pursuance of the crime vide FIR No. 45 of 2021 dated. 23.05.2021, Registered U/Sec. 270,273, IPC 2O(2) rlw 7(2) COTpA on the file of SHO of Police Station Chiragpally, Sangareddy, Cyberabad, pending disposal of the Ouash Petition.

¶312

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶313

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the lVemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Direct the Police/SHO Chiragpally, Sangareddy, Cyberabad, to release entire property Seized ie the Lorry bearing No. MH 25 U 7621 and the items i.e., Bl big bags and 4 small bags of Khaini packets total worth Rs 27,21 ,600l- seized in pursuance of the crime vide FIR No.45 of 202,1 dated. 23.05.2021, forthwith, pending disposal of the Quash Petition.

¶314

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of lr,4is S. M. Subhan, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶315

CRIMINAL PETITIO NNO: 4151 OF 2021

¶316

Between:

¶317

Su.rishetti Sridhar, S/o. Sathyanaraya ng, Aged about. 45 years, Occ. Business, Lakkaram Village, Choutuppal Manclal ,^Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, Telangana.

¶318

...Petitioner

¶319

AND

¶320

The State of Telangana, repleqgnted by the public p.osecutor, High Court. ar Hyderabad,Throug"h^{potice'station} Cf,duiuppaL

¶321

,,.RespondenUComplainant

¶322

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in crime. No.198 of 202i, on the file of Police Station choutuppal, Rachakonda for the alleged offence s uls 272, 273, tPC, 20(2) of COTP Act.

¶323

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶324

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated rn the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be preased to direct the Respondent to return tobacco material in connection with crime. No.

¶325

-rq^*

¶326

19A of 2021, Police Station Choutuppal, Rachakonda forthwith immediately pending disposal of the Criminal Petition in the interest of^justice.

¶327

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶328

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the It4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including arrest and appearance of the petitioners in Crime. No.'1 98 of 2021 , on the file of Police Station Choutuppal, Rachakonda pending disposal of the Criminal Petition in the interest of^justice.

¶329

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Srinivas Reddy Balakisti, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶330

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4157 OF 2021

¶331

Betwee n:

¶332

Sadinni l,4anikanta @ Nomula Mallikarjuna Rao, S/o. Venkateshwarlu, Ag ed 46 years, Occ, BusinesS, R/o. H.No.12-9-2117, Prakash Nagar Narsaraopet, G untur, District, Andhra Pradesh State -522601.

¶333

2 Para Linga Rao, S/o. P. Kistaiah, Aged 33 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.3102, Velpur, District Guntur, Andhra PradeshState -522646.

¶334

Chinthapalli Sheshagiri Rao, S/o. Venkateshwarlu, Aged 30 years, Occ.Busjness, R/o. H.No.5-18, Near Ramalayam TempleTh ondapi, Guntur, District Guntur, Andhra Pradesh Slate -522412.

¶335

Chinthapalli Harikrishna, S/o. Venkateshwarlu, Aged 36 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.5-42, Near Ramalayam Temple,Thondapi, Guntur, District Guntur, Andhra Pradesi Stale -522412.

¶336

... Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 4

¶337

¶338

Sub lnspector of Police, Chityala (NLG) Police Station, Rachakonda District,

¶339

...RespondenUComplainant

¶340

The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶341

...RespondenUComplainant

¶342

Petition under Section 482 Read with 451 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners in Crime No. 134 of 2021 of Chityal(NLG) Police Station, Nalgonda District.

¶343

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶344

Petition under Section 482 rlw 451 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the l,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.1 to return Material seized 01). Blue Bull

¶345

Tobacco^'143 White Colour bags, and 01 other White Colour Bag containing with as 02). SR-1--15 Packets, 03) Gova-1000 Tobacco 01^packet, 04).Sagar Pan lVlasala01 Packet, 05). Vimal Tobacco 02^packets and 06). K-9000 Gutka Packets-02 and seized 144 white Colour bags and also DCM Bearing No. AP 07 TD 9285 and two Cell Phones Ml 10 T SIM No.9505777727 and VIVO SIM No. 99488029958 by the 1st Respondent in Crime No. 134 of 2021 of Chityal (NLG) Police Station, Nalgonda District. pending disposal of the main case.

¶346

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/s C. Sunitha Kumari, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶347

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4178 OF 2021

¶348

Between:

¶349

Adapa Ravi Kumar, S/o. A. Satyanarayana, Aged about 47 years, Occ. Business, po. H.N.o, 9-.7-1571158, Bommidivari Street, Kaman Bazar, Beside Sri Balaji Residential, Khammam Urban, Khammam District.

¶350

...Petitioner/Accused

¶351

AND

¶352

1 Sub - lnspector of Police, Khammam I Town Police Station, Khammam District. ... RespondenUCom pla inant

¶353

2 The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶354

...RespondenUComplainant

¶355

Petition under Section +az nea<itwiti'-+i1 of cr.p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal^petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the^petitioners in C.C. No. 810 ol 2021 on the file of lAdditional Judicial First Class tr/agistrate, at Khammam, District Khammam.

¶356

l.A. NO: 2OF 2021

¶357

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that ir the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the I Additional Judicial First class Magistrate, at Khammam to return the Material^'1 ). Gova Gutkha packets 21 3X60X10=Rs127,8001 2). Amber gutka packets 67OX25X2O = Rs3,35,000/- 3. Meeraj gutka big size 1SXlSX30 =Rs 6,7SOt 4. It/eeraj gutka Small size 22x15x2O =Rs 6,6001 5. R. R packets 36x20x20 =Rs 14,4001-, 5. Chain Khainygutka packets 17X15X30=Rs 7650/-, 6. Swagathgutka packets 3X11X40 =Rs 1,320/- 7. G-One Gutka packets S0X60X1O=Rs 30,OOO/-, B. Vl tobacco 32X30X'10 / =Rs 9,600/- Totat Worth of Rs S,32.320 /- And One Scooty Motorcycle bearing No. TS 04 EX 1758 Seized by the l st Respondent in crime No

¶358

-R(-

¶359

70 of 2021 of Khammam lTown Police Station, Khammam, Khammam District pending disposal of the main case.

¶360

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/s C. Sunitha Kumari, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶361

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4182 OF 2021

¶362

Between:

¶363

Adapa Ravi Kumar, S/o. A. Satyanarayana, Aged about 47 years, Occ. Business, PJo. H.No. 9-7-1571158, Bommidivari Street, Kaman Bazar, Beside Sri Balaji Residential, Khammam Urban, Khammam District.

¶364

Puchakayala Suresh, S/o. Ramanadham, Aged About 36, Occ. Business, R/o. H. No. 1 -35, Tallampahad, Khammam Rural, District Khammam.

¶365

...Petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2

¶366

AND

¶367

1 Sub lnspector of Police, Raghunadhapalem Police Station, Khammam District. ... Responde nUCom plaina nt

¶368

2 The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶369

...RespondenUComplainant

¶370

Petition under Section 482 Read with 451 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lv]emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners in Crime No. 7 4 of 2021 of Police Station Raghunadhapalerh,Xhammam District.

¶371

l.A. NO: 2OF 2021

¶372

Petition under Section 482 Rlw 451 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.'1 to return Material seized (1) Goas 5 Bags = 275x 60x'10 total 1,65,000, (2) Amber 6 Bags = 600x25x20 = 3,00,000. (3) Swagath Ghutkas 2 Bags = 126x10x30 = 37,800. Total amount comes under Rs.5,02,800/- valued stock, on the observation of the Car Registration No. TS 04EY 2841, Tayota ETIOS company having ash colour Seized by the 1st Respondent in Crime No 74 of 202'1 of P.S., Raghunadhapalem Police Station, Khammam District pending disposal of the main case.

¶373

¶374

-1'l -4\a!

¶375

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:4187 OF 2021

¶376

Between:

¶377

Sunil Sharma, S/o. Ramswaroop Sharma, Age 39 years, Occ. Business, R/o. lvlain Road, Mancherial.

¶378

... Petitione r/Acc used

¶379

AND

¶380

The State of Telangana, Through SHO Police Station Mancherial Town, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana.

¶381

...Respondent

¶382

Petition under section 482 ol cr.P.c 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 FIR No.202 of 2021 , dated 09.0S.202i on the fite of SHO Police Station Mancherial Town against the Petitioner/Accused.

¶383

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶384

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c 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 FIR No.202 of 2021, dated 09.05.2021 on the file of SHo Police station Mancherial rown including appearance of the petitio ner/accused.

¶385

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the rvremorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri Kondadi Ajay Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioner and.thq,flqblic prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶386

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4194 OF 2021

¶387

Between:

¶388

Mohammed lbrahim Saudagar, S/o. Abdul. Nadeem Saudagar, aged about 25 years, Occ. Business, Propri-etor M/s Tawakkal Traders, Ryo. "Fl;i f.t"".iOi. Fr[", Valley, Shaikpet, Tolichowki, Golconda, HyderabaO.^{- -'}

¶389

... Petition e riAcc u se d

¶390

AND

¶391

Ll,S 9!Et:_"f lglqlOala,^{thro_ughStjrtion Houseofficer, police Station Gotconda,} Hyderabad, represented by^public prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶392

... Res pon de nUCom pla in a nt

¶393

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the c.c.No.6'167 of 2021 on the file of the court of XVll Additional chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally Hyderabad, against the petitioner/Accused herein, in the interest of justice.

¶394

LA. NO: 1 OF²⁰²¹

¶395

Petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of criminal^{Petition,the High courtmay be pleased} to^pass an order releasing the^{followingseizedtobacco products under F.l.R.No.69} of 2021 dated. 03.03.2021^{registered by Policestation Golconda, Hyderabad, which} were officially deposited before the^{XVll Additional ChiefMetropolitanMagistrate} Nampally Hyderabad, as^per Form^{No.66 vide P.1.No.124 12021 and the samewas in} the physical custody of Police Station^{Golconda Hyderabad, and hand over the same} to the petitioner herein i.e.^{( 1} )^{Baba Black Tobacco-19 Boxes(each box containing} 2 tins, each tin of 200^{grams) (2) Baba 120 Tobacco (26.1 grams)-8o boxes (each} box containing 58 sachets)^{(3) Baba 120 Tobacco(50 grams)-B boxes(each box} containing 5 tins)⁽⁴⁾ Baba^{120 Tobacco (20 grams)-1 box (each box containing10} tins)⁽⁵⁾ Baba 120 Tobacco^{(10 grams)-3 boxes(each box containing 10 tins)(6)} Baba160Tobacco.4minitinsofl0grams(7)VlTobacco-4bags(eachbag containing 50^{packets, each packet containing30 sachets)(8) sR-1Tobacco-9o} packets (each packet containing 70 sachets)^{(9) RR Gold Tobacco-S bags (each} containing 50^{packets(eachpackets containing70 sachets)and 34 packets(10)} Ir/iraj (10^grams)-4s boxes^{(each boxcontaining20 sachets (11) Baba 160 (0.5} grams)-23 boxes (each box containing^{30 sachets) (12) Miraj(1 6 grams)-46 boxes} (each box containing 20 sachets⁽¹³⁾ swagath^{Gold Tobacco-43packets (each} packet containing 1.1 pouches) (14) uK^{-3300 tobacco-13 boxes (eachbox} containing 10 tins)⁽¹⁵⁾ Shivaji^{Tobacco (30 grams)-2 boxes (each box containing 10} tins) (16) SR Tobacco-3 boxes^{(eachbox.conlqining10 mini boxes and 5 boxes (17)} Loose Tobacco-,l4 boxes^{(each box coritaining1O sachets) (18) Amber tobacco-33} packets (each packet containing 25 sachets^{(19) XL-Ol Tobacco-47 packets (each} packet 30 sachets) (20) Raja Tobacco-S^{packets(each packet containing 22 sachets} (21) RR Tobacco-10 packets^{(each packet containing 20 sachets (22)Manikchand-} 10 boxes (each box containing^{60 sachets)(23) LooseZada -g packets(24) Ratna} Tobacco (50^grams)-7 tins^{(25)Ratna Tobacco (200 grams)-1 tin (26) 222 Tobacco} (50 grams)-1 piece, pending disposal of^{main criminalPetition in the interest of} .lustice.

¶396

This Petition coming on for^{hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of} Grounds of criminal^{Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri s.} chandrasekhar, Advocate^{for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutoron behalf of} the Respondent.

¶397

CRIMINAL P ETITION^{NO: 4216OF 2021}

¶398

Between:

¶399

.1 . Buraoadda Varaprasad Babu, S/o. Shanker Bhasker Rao, Aged about 46 years, 52.]"E-rrl"i;;;"F6:H.No: 7-tso,^{KaltugaddaBazar, Gandhinasar' Kodad'} Mandal Kodad, Nalgonda^{District-508206.}

¶400

¶401

) Pathan Nadimkhan, S/o. John Khan, Aged 48 Years, Occ. Business, Fl/o H.No 1-38, Durajpalli, Nalgonda District -508213.

¶402

... Petitioners/Acc used No.1 and 2

¶403

AND

¶404

Sub -lnspector of Police, Thirumalayapalem Police Station, Khammam District.

¶405

...RespondenUComplainant

¶406

The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶407

...RespondenUComplainant

¶408

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners in c.c. No. 1298 of 202'l on the file of Principal Judicial First class Magistrate (PDM) at Khamma:n, District Khammam.

¶409

l.A. NO: I OF 2021

¶410

Petition under Section 482 o'f cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to dlspense with filling of certified copy of c.c. No 1298 ol 2021 principal Judiciat First Class Magistrate (PDM) at Khammam in the above quash petition.

¶411

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶412

Petition under section 482 Fy,t.r4fi!*of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Honorable principal Judicial First class Magistrate (PDM), at Khammam to return Material seized 1) Ambe11955X25X20=Rs9,77,500/- and Goa Gutkha packets 52X60X10=31,200^ Total worth of Rs 10,08,700/- and cash of Rs 2i,0ool (500 Notes 39) (100 Notes 15) 2) CRETA bearing No. T5-29-A-5678 seized by the 1st Respondent in crime No 50 o'f 2021 of Police station Thirumalayapalem police station, Khammam District pending disposal of the main case.

¶413

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/s c. sunitha Kumari, Advocate for the Petitioners and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶414

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4230 OF 2021

¶415

Between:

¶416

Pu.chakayala Suresh, S/o. Ramanadhann, Aged about 36, Occ. Business, R/o. H. No. 1 -35, Tallarnpahad, Khammam Rura i, Districi khamm'rrn-

¶417

7-b*

¶418

Patibandla Ramesh Babu, S/o. Mallikarjun Rao, Aged, 50 Years, Occ. Business, R/o. Nadimitanda Village Khammam Rural Mandal,^Drstrict Khatnmam.

¶419

...Petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2

¶420

AND

¶421

1 Head-Constable, Thirumalayapalem Police Station, Khammam^District.

¶422

... Responde nUCom plainant

¶423

2 The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶424

... Res ponde nUCom plaina nt

¶425

Petition under Section 482 Read with 451 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition, the High} Court may be pleased to^quash the^proceedings against the^{Petitioners in C.C.No.} 829 ol 2021 on the file of Principal Judicial^{First ClassMagistrate (PDM) at} Khammam, District Khammam.

¶426

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶427

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances^stated in the l,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court^{may be pleased} to dispense with filling of certified copy of C.C. No 829 of^{2021 Principal JudicialFirst} Class Magistrate (PDt/) at Khammam in the above^{quash petition.}

¶428

LA. NO: 2OF 2021

¶429

Petition under Section 482 Rlw 451 of Cr.P.C^praying that in^the circumstances stated in the Memorandum'ot Gilunas of Criminal^{Petition,theHigh} Court may be pleased to direct the Principal Judicial First Class^{Magistrate (PDM).at} Khammam to return Material seized 1) Red Color 09^{Plastic bags worth of Rs} 4,40,000 /- 2) White Color 04 Plastic bags worth of Rs 126000/- 3) One Red Color Meeraj Thambaku bag worth of Rs 15750 Bag 4) 4 One White^Color SwagathThambaku bag worth of Rs^'19500/- Total Rs 6.01,250/- and Car Bering^No AP 16 CD 0345 Tata Manza Company Car by the 1st Respondent in Crime^{No 14 of} 2021 ol Police Station Thirumalayapalem Police Station, Khammam District^pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶430

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/s C. Sunitha Kumari, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶431

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:4247 OF 2021

¶432

Between:

¶433

Shaik Azhar, S/o. Shaik Saleem, Aged about²² years, Occ. Business, R/o.Bhuktapur Locality, Adilabad Town, Adilabad District

¶434

... Petitione r/Acc us e d

¶435

¶436

AND

¶437

The State_of Telangana,, through S.H.O. Adilabad ll Town Police Station, Adilabad District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶438

...Respondents/Complainant

¶439

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the Higr court may be pleased to call for the records relating to case in crime.No. 61 of 2021 on the file of police station Adilabad ll rown, Adilabad District, and quash the proceedings in the above Crime.No.61 of 2021.

¶440

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶441

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal^petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the police to return the seized material in crime No. 6'l of 2021 of Adilabad ll rown Police Station, Adilabad District to the petitioner, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶442

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Gajanand chakravarthi, Advocate for the Petitioner and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶443

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4249 OF 2021

¶444

Between:

¶445

1 . Awadh Bushan Tripati,. S/o. ^^{R.amnarayanTripati,Aged about} - -'³⁶ --^years, occ.Business, R/o. Eihu(tapur, noiiabio i6wn, noitarac diiticl-

¶446

1. sajid. u.llah _Khan, s/o. Azmathullah Khan, Aged about 31 years, occ. Business, R/o. H.No. 3-B-29ili.^panjesha Mohaila nbitaoaa fouJn. aolfaoao oLjii"-t-'^-

¶447

...Petitioner/Accused No.1 and 2

¶448

AND

¶449

Ilg 91rtu^{of Telangana, througtr S.H.O.Aditabad I Town potice Station, Adilabad} ttistrict, represented by Public prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶450

... Res pon dents/C om pla in a n t

¶451

Petition under section 482 ol cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to call for the records relating to case in crime. No. 101 of 2o2i on the file of potice station Adilabad I Town, Adilabad District, and quash the proceedings in the above Crime.No.101 of 2021 .

¶452

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶453

Petition under Section 482 ol cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased

¶454

-.a7-

¶455

to direct the^{police to return the seized material in Crime No.101Of 2021 OI Adilabad} I Town Police station,^{Adilabad District to the petitioner, pending disposalof the} above Criminal Petition.

¶456

This Petition coming^{on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of} Grounds of Criminal^{Petitionand upon hearing the argumentsof Sri Gajanand} chakravarthi, Advocate^{for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the} Respondent.

¶457

CRIMINAL PETITION^{NO: 4251 OF2021}

¶458

Between:

¶459

Shaik Arbaz, S/o.^{Shaik Akbar,Aged about} 23 years, Occ.^Business, R/o.Shadnagar, Mavala,^{Adilabad District'}

¶460

... Petitione r/Acc^used

¶461

AND

¶462

The state of Telangana,^{througtS.H.O.AdilabadI Town Policestation,Adilabad} Di;i*[ ;;^p d;nie-o^{ov i;u oi icF rosecuto r, H ig h court,Hvderabad'}

¶463

...Respondents/ComPlainant

¶464

Petition under section^{482 of cr.P.cprayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the Memorandum of^{Groundsof Criminal Petition,the High Court maybe pleased} to call for the records^{relating to case in crime. No. 90 of 2021 on the file of Police} Station Adilabad lTown,^{Adilabad District, and quashthe proceedings in the above} Crime. No. 90 of^2021.

¶465

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶466

Petition under section^{482 of cr.P.cprayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the N,4emorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased} to direct the^police to^{returnthe seized material in crime.No. 90 of 2021 of Adilabad} I Town Police station,^{Adilabad Districtto the petitioner, pending disposalof the} above Criminal Petition.

¶467

ThisPetitioncomingonforhearing,uponperusingtheMemorandumof Grounds of criminal^{Petition and upon hearing the argumentsof sri Gajanand} chakravarthi, Advocate^{for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutoron behalfof the} Respondent.

¶468

CRIMINAL PETITION^{NO: 4258 OF 2021}

¶469

Between:

¶470

Shaik Arbaz, S/o.^{Shaik Akbar,Aged about 23 years, Occ Business'} R/o.Shad nagar, Mavala,^{Adilabad District.}

¶471

...Petitioner/Accused

¶472

-q-8-

¶473

AND

¶474

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O. Adilabad I Town Police Station, Adilabad District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶475

... Respondents/Com plain a nt

¶476

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the ltrlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to case in crime. No. 91 of 2021 on the file of police Station Adilabad I Town, Adilabad District, and quash the proceedings in the above Crime. No.91 of 2021.

¶477

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶478

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the police to return the seized material in crime No. 91 of 2o2i of Adilabad I Town Police Station, Adilabad District to the petitioner, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition.

¶479

¶480

CRIMINAL PETITION N O: 4262 OF 2021

¶481

Between:

¶482

Between: j-,.1."::

¶483

1. Sajid Ullah Khan, S/o. Azmathuilah Khan, Aqed about 31 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No. 3-8-29711 ,^panjesha Mohaila Adite'bad Town, Adilabad District.

¶484

Tarbez..Khaliq,..S/o..Abdul .Kha.!q,.Aged about 28 years, Occ. Business, Rr/o. Badkamohella, Ad ilabad Locality, AdJtabad Districl.

¶485

...Petitioner/Accused No.1 and 2

¶486

AND

¶487

The State of Telangana, Through S.H.O. Adilabad lTown police Station, Adilabad District, represented by^public prosecutor, High Court, Hydera6ad.

¶488

... Res ponde nts/Com plaina nt

¶489

Petition under Section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to call for the records relating to case in crime. No. 107 oi 2o2j on the file of police Station Adilabad lrown, Adilabad District, and quash the proceedings in the above Crime. No.'107 of 2021 .

¶490

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶491

Petition under section 482 of cr,p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Groundi of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased

¶492

-41-

¶493

to direct the police to return the seized material in Crime No. 107 oI 2021 of Adilabad I Town Police Station, Adilabad District to the^{petitioner, pending disposalof the} above Criminal Petition.

¶494

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Gajanand Chakravarthi, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶495

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:4277 OF 2021

¶496

Between:

¶497

'1 . lvld N,4unawar Rahman Syed, S/o. Syed Abdul Rehman, aged 30 years, Occ.Private Business, R/b. Mahmood Nagar,^{Rajendranagar,Hyderabad} Telangana State.

¶498

Anil Kumar, S/o. Arjun aged.36^years, Occ.^{Driver,Fi"/o. Modgal(Village),} [,4a rku nd a⁽ l\lland al), B idar⁽ District), Ka rnataka.

¶499

Subbannai, S/o. Dulappa, aged.40^years, Occ.^{Driver,R/o.Kollur(Village),} Chincholi, Gulbarga(District), Karnataka.

¶500

...Petitioners

¶501

AND

¶502

The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor^{High Court of} Telangana, Hyderabad. Thiough Police Station Abdullapurmet,^Rachakonda, Cyberabd, Telangana.

¶503

...Respondent

¶504

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances^stated in the lr4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to Quash the^proceedings vide FIR No. 1,62 otQ021 dated.05-06-2021,^Registered U/Sec. 108,272.273,328 IPC on the file of SHO of Police Station^{Abdullapurmet} Rachakonda, Cyberabad, as illegal, unconstitutional, contrary to^{law, without} jurisdiction and as such liable to be quashed in the interest of^justice by directing the police to release the Property seized i.e., the Lony bearing No. MH 1'1 AL 5653 and the items i,e,, l) RR tobacco-81 big bags^{(2,72,160 pouches)} approximately^W/Rs. 25,00,000/-. 2) Ashok Leyland Lorry bearing No. MH 11 AL 5653,3)^{Mobile Phones-} 02(i.e. lti i 43, TMZ) in pursuance of the crime vide FIR No. 162 of 2021^forthwith.

¶505

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶506

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Coud may be^pleased to Direct the Police/ SHO Abdullapurmet Rachakonda, to release entire^property Seized ie Lorry bearing No. MH 11 AL 5653 and the items^{i.e., 1) RR tobacco-81big} bags(2,72,160 pouches) approximately W/Rs. 25,00,0001-,2) Ashok^LeylandLorry bearing No. N/H 11 AL 5653, 3) Mobile Phones- 02(i.e.^{tvi A3, TMZ) seizedin} pursuance of the crime vide FIR No.162 of 2021 dated. 05-06-2021, fo(hwith pending disposal of the Quash Petition.

¶507

-30-

¶508

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶509

Petition under Section 482 oi Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay all further proceedings in pursuance of the crime vide FIR No. 162 of 2O2j dated. 05-06-2021, Registered U/Sec. 188,272,273,328 tpC on the file of SHO of Police Station Abdullapurmet, Rachakonda, Cyberabad, pending disposal of the Quash Petition.

¶510

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/s S. M. Subhan, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent,

¶511

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4361 OF 2021

¶512

Between:

¶513

1 Shaik lmtiyaz.Ahmed,.S/o. Faz_al Ahmed, Aged about 42yearc, Occ. pan Masala Dealer, Near Noorani Masjid, Khagaznagar,-Komaram Bh'eem AsifabaO Oidtiici^-

¶514

2 9olem^{Thirupqthi,S/o Shankaraiah, Aged about 40 years,} Occ. Owner of SRR Water Plant, Ryo. H.No.1-7011 , Srirama Colony, Re6bena Village nnO fr,lanOai Asifabad District.

¶515

...Petitioner/Accused No."l and 2

¶516

AND

¶517

The state of relangana, through s.H.o. Re-bbena porice Station, Asifabad D istrict, re presente"o oy euriicFroleCitloiS-i$rr 6o uh, a1 Hyd ;;;6;.^{" " -'}

¶518

...RespondenURespondent

¶519

Petition under Section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to call for the records relating to case in c.c.No. 1oB of 2021 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate First class, at Asifabad, and Quash the proceedings in the above C.C.No.108 of 2021 .

¶520

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶521

Petition under Section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the ltrlemorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioner in c.c.No 10g of 2021 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate First class, at Asifabad, pending disposal of the above Criminal petition.

¶522

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the fvemorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V. yadu Krishna

¶523

_j--

¶524

Sainath, Advocate for the Petitioners and the^{Public Prosecutoron behalf} of the Respondent.

¶525

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4405 OF 2021

¶526

Between:

¶527

Laxmi Narsaiah Pola, S/o. Musalaiah, Age 59 years, Occ. Business, Fl/o. H.No.411-404,DVK Road, Nalgonda Town, Nalgonda District.

¶528

...Petitioner/Accused

¶529

AND

¶530

The State of Telanangana, through SHO Police Station Nalgonda I Town, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana.

¶531

...Respondent

¶532

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^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 FIR No.202 of 2021, daled 04.06.2021^{on the file of} SHO Police Station Nalgonda I Town against the Petitioner/Accused.

¶533

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶534

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^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 FIR No.202 of²⁰²¹ , dated^04.06.2021on the file of SHO Police Station Nalgonda I Town including appearance of^the pel itloner/accused.

¶535

This Petition coming on for hearihg, upon^perusing the Memorandum^of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Kondadi^Ajay Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶536

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4415 OF 2021

¶537

Between:

¶538

Laxmi Narsaiah Pola, S/o. Musalaiah, Age 59 years, Occ. Business, R/o.H.No.41 1-404, DVK Road, Nalgonda Town, Nalgonda District.

¶539

...Petitioner/Accused

¶540

AND

¶541

The State of Telangana, through SHO Police Station Nalgonda ll Town, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana.

¶542

... Respondent

¶543

Petition under Section 482 ot Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased lo^quash the^proceedings in FIR No.232 of 2021 , daled 07.06.2021 on the file of SHO Police Station Nalgonda ll Town against the Petitioner/Accused.

¶544

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶545

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c 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 FIR No.232 of 2021 , dated 07.06.2021 on the file of SHo Police station Nalgonda ll rown including appearance of the petitioner/accused.

¶546

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Kondadi Ajay Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioner and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶547

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:4542 OF 2021

¶548

Between:

¶549

Kushal Kumar Jgjy, 9{o,. Radheyshyam Jaju, Age. 26 years. Occ. Business, R/o.H.No. 6-4-1 54, Nethaji Market Koth-agudem tVairdalam, KothagucJe.n Khammam.

¶550

Bathula Satynaryana, S/o. Radha Krishna @ Sathish. Aoe. 45 yea rs,

¶551

Occ.Business, Fl/o. 4-6-3415, Gajula Rajam Basthi, KothJgudem Coils, Khammam.

¶552

...Petitioners

¶553

AND

¶554

1 llgfJ?|"^{plJ9qlS9,n.,representedby its pubtic prosecutor, Hish Courr} truI0tngs, t-tyderabad.

¶555

2 D. Venu 9nal.Qe:, S/o. Not Known Age. Nol l t-o*n, Occ. lnspector of police Kothagudem lll Town Police Station Badradri Xotndgudem Districl.^{-- --}

¶556

...Respondents

¶557

Petition under section 4g2 of cr.p.i p*!ng trt in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to call for the records relating to proceedings crime No. 87 of 2021 on the file of Police Station Kothagudem il Town for the offences under Section 188,269 270,273 r/w 34 of lPC, 3 EDA, sl (B) Disaster Management Act and quash the same so far as the Petitioners are concerned as illegal.

¶558

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶559

Petition under Section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to direct the respondent to release the seized property of the petitioners an in crime No. 87 of 2021 on the fire of police Station Kothagudem il Town for the offences under Section 188, 269 270,273 rlw 34 of rpc, 3 EDA, s1 iB) DMA so far as the Petitioner is concerned.

¶560

-33*

¶561

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶562

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in lhe N,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court^{maybe pleased} to stay all the further proceedings in Crime^{No. 87 of 2021 on the file of Police} Station Kothagudem lll Town for the offences under Section 188, 269, 270,273^rlw 34 of lPC, 3 EDA, 51 (B) DMA so far as the Petitioner is concerned.

¶563

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum^of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of^{M/s N. Arthi,} Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutol on^{behalf of the} Respondents.

¶564

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:4612 OF²⁰²¹

¶565

Between:

¶566

Shaik Shafiq Ahmed, S/o. Shaik Ahmed,^{Aged about.40 years,Occ. Business'} Fl/o. Pinjarigutta, Nirmal.

¶567

...Petitioner/Accused

¶568

AND

¶569

I The State of Telangana, represented by its^{Public Prosecutor, High Court for the} State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶570

2 The Sub lnspector of Police, Police Station Nirmal^{Town, Nirmal District}

¶571

...Respondents/Defacto Complainant

¶572

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that^{in the circumstances stated} in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminql Pgj|liqn,^{the High Court may be pleased} to^quash the^proceedings against the^{p'etitioner/ accusedin C.C.No.533of 2020} arising out of crime No. 365 of 2020 on the^{file of AdditionalJudicial First class} l,4agistrate, at Nirmal and consequently to return the^{material seized in C.C.No.533} ol 2O2o arising out of Crime No. 365 of 2020 of^{NirmalTownPoliceStation,Nirmal} Dlstrict and the same is deposited in the Court of Additional^{Judicial First Class} lvlagistrate, at Nirmal.

¶573

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶574

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P.C^praying that in^{the circumstances stated} in the Nilemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the^{High Court may be pleased} to stay all further proceedings including the appearance of the^{petitioner/ accusedin} C.C.No.533 of 2020 arising out of Crime No.365 of 2020 on^{the file of Additional} Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Nirmal.

¶575

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum^of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the^{arguments of M/s P. Radhika'} Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on^{behalf of the Respondents.}

¶576

.-2.1_

¶577

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4615 OF 2021

¶578

Between:

¶579

1 ggjegg [h.an, S{q, Mahetoob_Khan, Aged about 3,1 years, Occ, Driver, R/o. Pinajarigutta, Nirmal, Nirmal District.

¶580

Shaik Shafeeq Ahmed, S{9, Shar! Ahmed, Aged about 39 years, Occ. Business, R:/o. Pinjarigutta , Nirmal, Nirmal District. (Owner Hira pan Store)

¶581

...Petitioners/Accused 1 and 2

¶582

AND

¶583

If'q^{Stqtg of Telangana, represented by its pubtic prosecutor,High} Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶584

2 The Sub lnspector of Police, Police Station Nirmal Town, Nirmal District

¶585

...Respondents/Defacto Complainant

¶586

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/ accused No. 1 and 2 in crime No. 225 of 2021 of Nirmal rown Police station, at Nirmal District and consequenily to return the material seized in crime.No.22s of 2021 and the same is deposited in the Nirmal Town Police Station. at Nirmal District.

¶587

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶588

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including the appearance of the petitioners/ accused No l and 2 in crime No.225 of 2021 of .,.Eqr ro*n porice station, at Nirmar District, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶589

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal^petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/s p. Radhika, Advocate for the Petitioners and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶590

c INAL PETITION O:4622 oF 2021

¶591

Between:

¶592

Azmath Khan, Sio. Azeez Khan, Aqed about.. 2l years, Occ. Business, R/o. Ka reem Co lony, Khanapur Town, District Niima t.

¶593

shaik Rafeeo Ahmed, s/o. Shaik Ahmed, Aoed about.36 years, occ, Business, R/o. Pinjariguita, Nirm'al.

¶594

...Petitioners/Accused No.1 ancl 2

¶595

AND

¶596

1 The state of relanoana. renresented by its public prosecutor, High court for the State of Telanganal at Hydbrabad.

¶597

2 The Sub lnspector of Police, police Station Khanapur, Nirmal District.

¶598

...Respondents/Defacto Complainant

¶599

.. 35-

¶600

petition under section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated

¶601

in the lr,4emorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition,the HighCourt may be pleased} to quash the^proceedings againstthe^{petitioners/accused No.1 and 2 in C.C.No.622} of 2019 arising out of Crime No. 48 of^{2019on the file of Additional JudicialFirst} class Magistrate, at Nirmal and consequently to^{return the materialseized in} C.C.No.622 of of 2019 arising out of Crime No.^{48 of 2019 of KhanapurPolice} Station, Nirmal District and the same is deposited^{in the Courtof Additional Judicial} First Class lr,4agistrate, at Nirmal.

¶602

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶603

Petition under section 482 ot Cr.P.C^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the Memorandum of Grounds of^{criminalPetition,the High court may be pleased} to stay all further^{proceedings including the appearance of the petitioners/ accused} No.1 and 2 in c.c.No.622 ol 2019^{arising out of crime No.48of 2019 on the file of} Additional Judicial First class^{Magistrate,at Nirmal, pending disposal of above} quash petition.

¶604

This Petition coming on for hearing,^{uponperusing the Memorandum of} Grounds of criminat Petition and^{upon hearingthe arguments of M/s P. Radhika,} Advocate for the Petitioners and the^{Public Prosecutor on behalf of the} Respondents.

¶605

cRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4632 OF 2921

¶606

Betwee n:

¶607

Shaik Rafeeq Ahmed, S/o.^{Shaik Ahmed, Aged about 31 years, Occ. Business'} FYo. Pinjarigutta, Nirmal.

¶608

..'Petitioner/Accused No.3

¶609

AND

¶610

The State of Telangana, represented^{by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the} State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶611

The Sub lnspector of Police,^{Police StationSarangapur, Nirmal District.}

¶612

..,Respondents/Defacto Complainant

¶613

Petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the N.4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,^{the High Court may be pleased} to quash the proceedings against the^{petitioned accused No'3 in C.C.No.413of} 2O2O arising out of Crime No.36 of 2020^{on the file of Additional Judicial First Class} Magistrate, at Nirmal and consequently to^{return the material seized in c.c.No.413} o,f 2o2o arising out of crime ruo.^go or^{2o2o ol Sarangapur Policestation,Nirmal} District and the same is deposited in the^{Court of AdditionalJudicial FirstClass} Itrlagistrate, at Nirmal.

¶614

-.5b-

¶615

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶616

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including the appearance of the petilioner/ accused No.3 in C.C.No.413 of 2020 arising out of Crime No.36 of 2020 on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Nirmal, Pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶617

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of M/s p. Radhlka, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents,

¶618

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4640 0F 2021

¶619

Between:

¶620

Shaik Shafeeq Ahmed (Shafi), S/o. Shaik Ahmed, Aoed about 3g vears. Occ pan Shop, R/o. Pinjarigutta, Nirmal, Nirmal District (Owner of Hira pan Store)

¶621

...Petitioner/Accused No.1

¶622

AND

¶623

1 If,q^{St?E of Telangana,represented by its Public prosecutor,High Court for the} State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶624

2 The Station House Officer, Police Station Mamada, Nirmal District.

¶625

.,.Respondents/Defacto Complainant

¶626

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/ accused No.1 in crime No. g9 of 2020 of Mamada Police station, at Nirmal and consequently to return the material seized in crime No.Bg of 2020 of Mamada police station, at Nirmal and the same is deposited in the Police Station Mamada, at Nirmal.

¶627

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶628

Petition under Section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the lVlemorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including the appearance of the petitioner/ accused No.1 in crime No.BO of 2020 of Mamada police, at Nirmal, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶629

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of lM/s p. Radhika, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶630

-3-T_GRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4681 OF²⁰²¹

¶631

Between:

¶632

Dundigalla Omprasad, S/o. Sathaiah, Aged about. 35 years, Occ. Business, Rio.H.No.G2, Rajiv Sagruhakalpa Apartment, Mammillaguda Road, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District.

¶633

...Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶634

AND

¶635

The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶636

The Sub lnspector of Police, Peddavoora Police Station, Nalgonda District.

¶637

...Respondents/ Defacto Complainant

¶638

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to quash the proceedings against the^petitioner/ accused No.2 in Crime^{No.1 86 of} 2021 of Peddavoora Police Station, Nalgonda District and consequently set aside the same.

¶639

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶640

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lt4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to stay all furlher proceedings including the arrest of the^petitioner/ accused^{No. 2 in} Crime No.186 ol 2021 of Peddavoora Police Station, Nalgonda District, Pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶641

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearlng the arguments of Sri Y. Bala Murali, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶642

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:4727 OF 2021

¶643

Between:

¶644

Banda Venkatesh, S/o. Banda Poshaiah, ASjed about. 21^years, Occ. Vehicle Owner, R/o. 2-17, Chowderpally Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶645

...Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶646

AND

¶647

1 The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶648

2 The Sub lnspector of Police, Adibatla Police Station, lbrahimpatnam Rachakonda Co mm issio nerate

¶649

...Respondents/Defacto Complainant

¶650

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/ accused in Crime No. of 146 of 2021 on the file of Adibatla Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate and

¶651

-55 -

¶652

consequently to return the seized vehicle i.e. Toofan BSlll vide No. Ap 22 TA 5059 along with Vivo Mobile (lN/El No.00868867050437576) of the petitioner.

¶653

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶654

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including the appearance of the petitioneri accused No. 2 in Crime No.146 ot 2021 on the file of Adibatla Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶655

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri y. Bala Murali, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondents.

¶656

CRIM INAL PETITION N O:4775 OF 2021

¶657

Between:

¶658

Pola Laxmi Narasaiah, S/o. Musalaiah, age SB years, Caste. Vysha, Occ. Owner of Aum Traders, R/o. H.No.4-1 1-404, Cha.jtanya-puri Colony, Naigonda Town.

¶659

Ateef Bhal-@ Mohammed Abdul Ralof Akhil, S/o. Mohammed Rasheed Akhit, 41 years, Occ. Private Business, Rl/o. Dabeerpura, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

¶660

Arshad Pasha, S/o. Gulam Dastagir, age 40 years. Caste. Muslim, Occ. Office W94gr.^{H.S. Traders,Njsai Plaza,Dabeerpr.ira,Hyderabad,} R/o.'H.No. 19_42791D1242, Tigatkunta, Near Govt. Hospitbt (UHp), Jahhanuma. Chirminar, Hyderabad.

¶661

shaikh Mahammad Shaikh sattar oureshi, S/o. Shaikh sathar oureshi. aoe 29 yearc, Caste. Qureshi, Occ. Worker in H.S. Traders, Nisal plaza, Dab'eeipura, Hyderabad.

¶662

...petitioners ANO

¶663

The State of Telangana,. represented by its public prosecutor High Court of Ielanoana. Throuoh Police Station Nalgonda-l Town, Nalgonda bistrict, TelanIana.

¶664

...Respondent

¶665

Petition under Section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to Quash the proceedings in crime vide FIR No. 234 of 2021 dated.^,l 1-6-2021 , Registered u/sec. 328, 272, 273, 1BB lpc on the file of SHo of potice station Nalgonda-l rown, Nalgonda District, Telangana, as illegal, unconstitutiona l, contrary to law, without jurisdiction and as such liable to be quashed in the interest of justice with a consequential direction to return the entire property seized in pursuance of the above crime forthwith.

¶666

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶667

Petition under section 482 ol cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased To Stay all further proceedings in crime vide FIR No. 234 of 2021 dated. 11-6-2021 , Registered u/Sec. 328, 272,273, 1BB lpc on the file of sHo of potice Station

¶668

-31*

¶669

Nalgonda-l Town, Nalgonda District, Telangana, pending disposal of the quash petition.

¶670

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶671

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the ctrcumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Direct the Police/SHO to forthwith to Return entire property seized in pursuance of the Crime vide FIR No. 234 of 2021 dated. 11-6-2021 , Registered UlSec. 328,272, 273, 188 IPC on the file of SHO of Police Station Nalgonda-l Town, Nalgonda District, Telangana, forthwith, pending disposal of the quash Petition.

¶672

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of lt/l/s S. M. Subhan, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶673

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4825 OF 2021

¶674

Between:

¶675

Kotte Anil Kumar, S/o. Thirupathaiah, Aged about 40 years, Occ. Business, Rio.H.No.9-35, Sulanagar, Takulapally, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶676

V. Thirupathi Rao @ BhasyamTirupatha Rao, S/o. Ramulu, Aged about 31 Years, Occ. Driver, R/o. H.No.3-83/1 , Chandrugonda, Khammam, Khammam District -507123.

¶677

... Petitioner/Acc used No.1 and 2

¶678

ANO

¶679

1 Sub-lnspector of Police, Police station Khammam (R), Khammam District.

¶680

...RespondenUComplainant

¶681

2 The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶682

...RespondenUComplainant

¶683

Petition under Section 482 Read with 451 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners in Crime No. 245 ol 2021 on the file of Police Station Khammam (R) Khammam District, in the circumstances mentioned above to meet the ends of .justice.

¶684

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶685

Petition under Section 482 Read with 451 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the to return the tobacco products packets ('1 ) 7 Bags of Amber Packets (7x 1 00 =7o0Packets. 700x25=1 7,500 Pouches), worth Rs.4, 20,0001- (2) One bag of Goa Gutkhas (60x60=3,600), worlh Rs.36,0001 and (3) lViraj Gutkhas-35 Packets (35x15=525 Pouches), worth Rs. 15,75O1- Total worth Rs. 4,71,7501- and Tata Mania Car bearing No. AP 10 AZ 8679 seized by the 1st

¶686

"4o -

¶687

Respondent in Crime No 245 of 2021 on the file of Police station Khammam (R) Khammam District, upon verification, pending disposal of the main case.

¶688

¶689

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶690

¶691

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶692

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶693

CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.1 52 153 155 162 & 5826 0F 2020 A 3s00.3509.3514. 3768 3879 4046 4070. 4077,.t098. 4099. 4100. 4102. 4l10. ll l9 +1.{0 {lJl 1151 4157 {178 4182 1t87 1191 1216 4230 1217 t219 1251. J2S 8.:l 262 1277 J36l 1,105^rl4I5 1512 4672 46r5. 4622 1632^,1610 rl68l 4727 4775 & 4825 0F 2021

¶694

COJVI,ION ORDER:

¶695

All the above Criminal Petitions are filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners - accused in respective Crimes / Calendar Cases. The details of relevant Crimes i Calendar Cases, offences alleged, nature of offences etc., are mentioned in

¶696

the fo)lowing tabular form:

¶697

sl. No	Crl.P. No.	Crime No.	Accused Number	Offences a)legedly committed	Natureofoffence
0l	3168t2t	217120ofPS Manoharabad	sole accused	272,213tPC& 20 (2)r/w1(2)of CO{PA	TransportationofAmber tobacco
0l	38'79/2t	33121ofPS Kadam	sole accused	2'10&273 rPC	saleofbannedtobacco products
0l	4A46t2t	78/21ofPS (T) Adilabad	A,t&2	-do-	Saleofgutka./tobacco illegallyin godown
0{.	401'712t	2rl2l ofPS Easgoan	sole accused	-do-	Possessionofgutka /tobacco inpan shop
05	4098121	I85/21ofPS(T) Nirmal	AIio3	2'.70,213 IPC&. 20 (2)ofCOTPA	Transponationof prohibited gutka
06	1099/21	No.36/21ofPS Koutala	sole accused	210&2'73 LPC	Possessionoltobacco products inthe house
0''l	,1100/21	No.38/21ofPS Easgoan	sole accused	2',70&213IPC	Possessionofbanned gutka&other tobacco items inpan shop
(rE	4t02t2t	455/21ofPS Kukatpally	sole accused	336,2'73&188 IPC&59(i)of FSSA	Transportationand sale ofprohibitedtobacco products
09	4t4tt2)	4512tofPS Chiragpally	Altol	210&2',73IPC& 20(2)r/w7(2)of COTPA	Transportationof tobaccoproducts
i0	4r5l/21	198/21ofPS Choutuppal	sole accused	272&273tPC& 20⁽²⁾ofCOTPA	Storageoftobacco products forsale
II	4151/2t	134/21ofPS Chiryal^(NLG)	A1to4	272, 273&328 rPc&z0^(r)&^'t (3) ofcoTPA	Purchase and saleof prohibitedtobacco products
l	4t82t2t	74121ofPS Raghunadhpalem	A1&2	270&213tPC	Transportation ofbanned tobacco/gutka
ll	418'7t21	202/21ofPS(T) Mancherial	sole accused	do	Possessionofbanned tobacco^products

¶698

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & barch

¶699

t4.	4247 /21	61/21ofPSU Town Adilabad	sole accused	-do-	Possessionofbanned gutkaproducrs
t5	4249/21	101/21ofPSI TownAdilabad	A1&2	-do-	Saleofgutkaand tobaccoproducts
16	4251/21	90/21ofPSI TownAdilabad	sole accused	-do-	About to transport noxious gutkaand tobacco products
t'7	42s8/2)	91/21ofPSI TownAdilabad	sole accused	-do	Saleofbannedgutkaand tobaccoproducts
18.	4262/21	107/21ofPSI TownAdilabad	At &2	-do-	Transportation ofgurka roducls andtobacco
19.	427't /21	162i21ofPS Abdullapurmet	A1to3	t88,2',72,273& 328tPC	Saleofbannedtobacco (tarnbaku) producrsirl Io
20.	4405/21	202121ofPSI Town Nalgonda	sole accused	188,272&213 IPC	Transportationof tka/tobacco roducts
21	4415/21	232/21ofPS1I (T)Nalgonda	sole accused	-do	Possessionofbanned gutka /tobaccoproducls
22	4542/21	87/21ofPSUI (T)Kothagudem		188,269,2't0, 273rlw34 IPC& 3ofEDA&51 O)^ofDMA	Possessionoftobacco products in kiranashop
23	46t5/21	225121ofPS NirmalTown	At &2	2',70&273tPC	Possessionofprohibited tobacco products forsale
24.	4640/21	89/20ofPS Mamada	A1	-do-r/w34 IPC	Transportationofbanned tobacco/ utka ockets
25	4681/21	186/21ofPS Peddavoora	A2	328rlw511, 272 &273IPC	Possessionofbanned gutka&tobacco ductsin kiranasho
26.	4',72',7/21	164/21ofPS Adibatla	1\2	2'10,212&213 IPC&20 (2) of COTPA	Transportationof cigarefte or othertobacco productswithoutvalid license
27.	41',75t21	234/21ofPSI (T)Nalgonda	Alto4	328,272,273& I88IPC	Saleofgutka&khaini
	4825t21	245121ofPS Kiammam	At &2	328, 270&2'.13 r/w 5lIIPC&20	Transportationofbanned
			CALEN	ofCOTPA DARCASES	tka
		3515119of	270	273&
29	152/20	t.AJMFC, lVarangai	188 &s8	, ,420tPC ofFSSA Transp	onationofbannedzarda products
30.	ts3/20	2724/19 of XVIIACMM, Hvd.	A2 27 IPC FSS	&273 &59 of A 2046 Sa	leofzarda illegally
31.	ls5/20	3518/19 of I.AJMFC, Warangal	A3 420 273 ofFS	,2',70& tPC&58 SA Transp	onationofbanned zarda
32.	t62/20	4737/18 of XIAMM, Sec.bad	A2 272, &4 20 COT	2',13,336 20 rPC& (2)of PA Saleo chew	fprohibitedgutkaand ingtobacco products
		Special
	5826/20	Magistrate ofIIClass, Jagtial At	&2 t88 2',73I	,2'70& PC Transp	onation of Ambergurka pockets
34.	3498/21	216120of JFCM, Devarkonda A	t &2 420 IPC	&2',13 Saleofb	annedtobaccoand gutka products
35.	3s00t2\|963/19of JFCM, Miryalguda Al	to4 420 IPC ofco	&2',13 &20(ii) rPA,2oo3 Transp	onationoftobaccoand tka roducts

¶700

¶701

Ctl.P. No.152 0f2020 & batch

¶702

i6	3509/21	452120of XXVMMC, Ibrahimpatan	Al&2	188,270& 2'73tPC,20 (2)ofCOTPA, 3ofEDA& 5l O)of DMA	Storageofbannedgutkaandother tobacooproductsiilegallyforsale
)'7	35t4t2t	632/19of xxvMMc, Ibrahimpatnam	Alto8	t88,270,213 &420 IPC& 20 (2)of COTPA	Supplyofgutkaand othertobacco products
	10'70/2)	54'1/21of P]MFC, Gajwel	Ar&2	272&2'13 rPc&20(2) rlw1(2)of COTPA	TransportationofAmber tobacco
l9	4It0/21	509/20of Spl.PCR Mobile Court-cum- JMFC, Adilabad	Alto5	270&2'71 rPc&20(2) rlw1Q)of COTPA	Transponationofpan masalaand bannedgutka
-l()	1tt9/21	512120of Spl.PCR Mobile Coun-cum- JMFC, Adilabad	Alto4	2'10,271,272 &213r/w34 IPC Sec.3ofEDA	Transportationofcottonseedsand bannedgutka
ll	4140i2i	STC No.20l21of IVAMM- cumlV AJCJ, L.B.Nagar	Al&2	212&213 IPC&Sec.20 (l),20(2)of COTPA	Transportationofbanned tobacco andgutka
.1l	1t78/2t	810/21of IAJMFC, Khammam	sole accused	210&2'13 rPc&20⁽²⁾ orcbPtA	Purchase and saleofbamed gutka
.1i	4194/2t	6\61121 of XVI]ACMM, Nampally	sole accused	t88,212& 213 tPC&20 (2)&5of COTPA	Saleoftobacco^productsilhis shop anddisobeyingthe rules imposed by Govt, in Not.No,505,trSS-12 l,dt.6.^1.2I
l-1	.+216i21	1298121of PJMFC, Khammam	At &2	270&273 tPc&.20(2) ofCOTPA	TransportationofAmber gutka
,15	123At2t	829/21of PJMFC, Khammam	At &2	-do-	Transportation ofgutka-/pan masala
16	1361t21	108/21of AJMFC, Asifabad	At&2	270&2't3IPC	Possessionoftobaccoproducts illegally forsale
l7	16t2t2t	533120of AJMFC, Nirmal	Sole accused	-do-	Purchase and saleofprohibited gukapockets
.13	4622t21	622119of AJMFC, Nlrmal	At&2	-do-	Possessionofgutkapackets at bus standforsaleillegally
t9.	4632t21	413120of AJMFC, Nirmal	A3	-do-w34 tPc &20⁽²⁾ ofCOTPA	Transponation ofbannedtobacco products

¶703

Heard Mr. M.A.K. Mukheed, Mr. Gajanand Chakravarthy,

¶704

N'lr. K. Surender, Mr. Praveen Kumar Veerjala, Ms. P. Radhika,

¶705

KL,J Crl,P, No.152 of2020 & barch

¶706

Mr. Srinivas Reddy Balakisti, Ms. C. Sunitha Kumari, Mr. Kondadi Ajay Kumar, Mr. S.M. Subhan, Ms. N. Arthi, Mr. y. Bala Murali. Mr. Boggula Raju, Mr. S. Chandrasekhar, Mr. V. yadukrishna Sainath, learned counsel appearing on behaif of respective petitioners and leamed Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondents _ State.

¶707

The question involved in all the above matters is one and the same and, therefore, the same are disposed of by way of this commor.r order.

¶708

The main allegations against the petitioners _ accused are that they were transporting, possessing, storing, selling and purchasing the banned products viz., tobacco / tambaku I grxka I khaini / zarda / panmasala respectively. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections --1.88;270, 269, 27 l, 27 2, 273, 32g, 336 & 420 read with 34 and 5l l ofthe Indian penal Code, 1g60 (for short 'IPC'); Sections - 20 (l), 20 e) and 5 read with ?(2) andT (3) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco products (prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, production. Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (for short^.COTp Act,); Secrions _ 58 and 59 ofthe Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (for short ,FSS Act'); Section - 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, ig97 (for short ,ED Act') and Section - 51 (b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 (for short DS Act) respectively.

¶709

¶710

KL.J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶711

The respective learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in the above criminal petitions would submit that the contents of complaint / charge sheet lacks the ingredients of the oflences alleged against the accused. For the offences under the provisions of FSS Act, only Food Safety Officer is having power to initiate crimir-ral proceedings against accused and the police are not having any power to register a case for the offences under the provisions of FSS Act. There is no inducement by the petitioners and, tlrerefore, oflence under Section - 420 of IPC does not arise. According to them, the contents of complaint / charge sheet are also laclting the ingredients ofthe offences under Sections -269,270,271, 272,273,328 and 336 ofIPC.

¶712

i) According to them, there is no violation of Sections - 20 (1), 20 (2) and 5 read with 7 (2) and 7 (3) of the COTP Act. The Investigating Officers / Complainants without following the procedure laid down undel the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), have registered the cases for the offence under Section - 188 of IPC and laid charge sheet against the accused. Necessary ingredients to attract the provisions of Section - 3 of the ED Act and Section - 5l (b) of the DM Act are lacking in the complaint / charge sheet

¶713

ii) With the above said submissions, the respective leamed counsel sought to quash the proceedings in the aforesaid crimes^/ calendar cases.

¶714

Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶715

On the other hand, leamed^{Public Prosecutorreferring to the} principle laid down in the State of Maharashtra^{v. Sayyed Hassan} Sayyed Subhanl by^{the Hon'ble Supreme Court and in Ganesh} Pandurang Jadhao v. The^State of^{Maharashtra2and Anand} Ramdhani Chaurasia v. The State^{of Maharashtra3 by the Bombay} High Court would submit^{that police are having power to register} cases under various provisions^{of IPC, COTP Act, ED Act and DM} Act. There is no irregularity in registering^{crimes, seizingmatedal} including the vehicles and laying^{charge sheet against respective} accused in the aforesaid crimes / calendar^{cases. According to him,} the accused were transporting,^{possessing,storing,} selling^and purchasing the banned products viz., tobacco / tambaku I^{gutka I} khaini / zarda I pan masala respectively.^{According to him, the} accused have to face either investigation or trial^{and prove their} innocence, and instead of doing'so;-they have filed the^present criminal petitions under Section - 482 of Cr.P.C.^{whichcannotbe} considered at this stage.

¶716

i) With the above said submissions, leamed Public^Prosecutor sought to dismiss the above criminal^petitions.

¶717

'/ . In view of the above rival submissions, it is apposite to extract the relevant provisions of IPC,^{COTP Act, FSS Act' ED Act} and DM Act, which are as under:

¶718

r. 2ol8 AIR (sc) 5348 'z.^{zot6 cti. L.J.24ot} r. 2019 scc online Bom 1857

¶719

¶720

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 o/2020 & batch

¶721

RELEVANT PROVISIONS UNDER IPC

¶722

"188.^{Disobedienceto order duly promulgatedby public} servant.-Whoever, knowing that, by an order promulgated by a public servant lawfully empowered to^promulgate such order, he is directed to abstain from a certain act, or to take certain order with certain property in his possession or under^his management, disobeys such direction, shall, if^such disobedience causes or tends to cause obstruction,^annoyanceor injury, or risk of obstruction, annoyance or injury, to^{any person} lawfully employed, be punished lyith simple imprisonment for^a term which may extend to one month or with fine^{which may} extend to two hundred rupees, or with both; and if^such disobedience causes or trends to cause danger to^humanlife, health or safety, or causes or tends to cause a riot or^affray,shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a^term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

¶723

Explanation.-lt is not necessary that the offender should intend to produce harm, or contemplate his disobedience^as likely to produce harm. It is sufficient-ttrat}te^knows of^{the order} which he disobeys, and that his disobedience^produces, or^is likely to produce, harm.

¶724

Illustration An order is^promulgated by^{a publicservant} Iawfully empowered to promulgate such order, directing that^a religious procession shall not^pass down a certain^street.A knowingly disobeys the order, and thereby causes^danger ofriot. A has committed the offence defined in this section."

¶725

"269. Negligent act likely to spread^{infectionof disease} dangerous to life.-Whoever unlawfully or negligently^does any act which is, and which he knows or^{hasreasonto believe to} be, likely to spread the infection of any^{disease dangerousto} life, shall be punished with imprisonment of either^description fbr a lerm which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both."

¶726

"270,^{Malignantact likely to spreadinfection of disease} rlangerous to life.-Whoever malignantly does any act^which

¶727

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶728

is, and which he knows or has reason to believe to be, likely to spread the infection of any disease dangerous to life. shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both."

¶729

"271. Disobedience to quarantine rule.-Whoever knowingly disobeys any rule made and promulgated by the Govemment for putting any vessel into a state of quarantine, or for regulating the intercourse of vessels in a state of quarantine with the shore or with other vessels, or for regulating the intercourse between places where an infectious disease prevails and other places, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both."

¶730

"272. Adulteration of food or drink intended for sale.Whoever adulterates any article of food or drink, so as to make such article noxious as food or drink, intending to sell such article as food or drink, or knowing it to be likely that the same will be sold as food or drink, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both."

¶731

"273. Sale of noxious fooa o" aiinf..]Wroever sells, or offers or exposes for sale, as food or drink, any article which has been rendered or has become noxious, or is in a state unfit for food or drink, knowing or having reason to believe that the same is noxious as food or drink, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both."

¶732

"328. Causing hurt by means of poison, etc., with intent to commit an offence.-Whoever administers to or causes to be taken by any person any poison or any stupefying, intoxicating or unwholesome drug, or other thing with intent to cause hurt to such person, or with intent to commit or to facilitate the commission of an offence or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of

¶733

¶734

Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶735

either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."

¶736

"336, Act endangering life or personal safety of others,_ Whoever does any act so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life or the personal safety of others, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to two hundred and fifty rupees, or with both.,,

¶737

"420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of p roperty.-Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, aller or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine."

¶738

"34. Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.-When a criminal agt is.dqne by several persons in furtherance of the common intention ofall, each ofsuch persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone."

¶739

"51l. Punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprison ment.-Whoever attempts to commit an offence punishable by this Code with imprisonment for life or imprisonment, or to cause such an offence to be committed, and in such attempt does any act towards the commission of the offence, shall, where no express provision is made by this Code for the punishment of such attempt, be punished with imprisonment of any description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one-half of the imprisonment for life or, as the case may be, one-half of the longest term of imprisonment provided for that offence, or with such fine as is provided lor the offence, or with both.',

¶740

KL,J Crl.P. No.152 of2020 & batch

¶741

RELEVANT PROVISIONS UNDER COTP ACT

¶742

"5. Prohibition of advertisement of cigarettes and other tobacco products.{l) No person engaged in, or purported to be engaged in the production, supply or distribution of cigarettes or any other tobacco products shall advertise and no person having contol over a medium shall cause to be advertised cigarettes or any other tobacco products through that medium and no person shall take part in any advertisement which directly or indirectly suggests or promotes the use or consumption of cigarettes or any other tobacco products.

¶743

(2) No person. for any direct or indirect pecuniary benefit, shall-

¶744

(a) display, cause to display, or permit or authorise to display any advertisement ofcigarettes or any other tobacco product; or (b) sell or cause to sell, or permit or authorise to sell a film or video tape containing advertisement of cigarettes or anv other tobacco product; or

¶745

(c) distribute, cause to distribute, or permit or authorise to distribute to the public any leaflet, hand-bill or document which is or which contains an advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco product; or

¶746

(d) erect, exhibit, fix or retain upon or over any land. building, wall, hoarding, frarne, post or structure or upon or in any vehicle or shall display in any manner whatsoever in any place any advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco product:

¶747

Provided that this sub-sectiorthall not apply in relation to-

¶748

(a) an advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco product in or on a package containing cigarettes or any other tobacco product;

¶749

(b) advertisement of cigarettes or any other tobacco product which is displayed at the entrance or inside a warehouse or a shop where cigarettes and any other tobacco products are offered for distribution or sale.

¶750

(3) No person, shall, under a contract or otherwise promote or

¶751

agree to promote the use or consumption of-

¶752

(a) cigarettes or any other tobacco product; or

¶753

(b) any trade mark or brand name of cigarettes or any other tobacco product in exchange for a sponsorship, gift, prize or scholarship given or agreed to be given by another person.,,

¶754

"20. Punishment for failure to give specified rvarning and nicotine and tar contents.-

¶755

(l)Any person who produces or manufactures ciBarettes or tobacco products, which do not contain, either on the package or

¶756

¶757

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & barch

¶758

or1 their label, the specified waming^{and the nicotine and tar} contents, shatl in the case of firsl conviction^{be punishablewith} imprisonment for a term which^{may extend to twoyears,or with} fine which may extend to five^{thousand rupees,or with both,} and for the second or subsequent^{conviction,with imprisonment} for a term which may extend to five^{years and with fine which} may extend to ten thousand^rupees.

¶759

(2) Any person who sells or distributes cigarettes^{or tobacco} products which do not contain either^{on the package or on their} Iabel, the specified warning^{and the nicotineandtar contents} shall in the case of^{first convictionbe punishablewith} imprisonment for a term,^{whichmay extend to oneyear, or with} fine which may extend to^{one thousand rupees,or with both,} and, for the second or^{subsequent conviction,with} imprisonment for a term^{which may extend to twoyeals and} with fine which may extend^{to theethousandrupees."}

¶760

"7. Restrictions on trade and^{commercein, and production'} supply and distribution of^{cigarettesand othertobacco} products.-

¶761

(l) No person shall, directly or indirectly,^{produce,supply or} distribute 6 cigarettes or^{anyt dttie:rlobacco productsunless} every package of cigarettes^{or any othertobaccoproducts} produced, supplied or distributed^{by himbearsthereon,or on its} label such specified warning^{includinga pictorial waming as} may be^prescribed.

¶762

(2) No person shall carry on uade^{or commercein cigarettesor} any other tobacco^{productsunlesseverypackageof cigarettesor} any other tobacco^{products sold, supplied or distributedby him} bears thereon, or^{on its label,thespecifiedwarning.}

¶763

(3) No person shall import^{cigarettesor any other tobacco} products for distribution or^{supplyfor a valuableconsideration} or for sale in lndia^{unless everypackageof cigarettes or any} other tobacco^{products so imported by him bearsthereon,or on} its label, the specified^warning.

¶764

(4) The specified warning^{shallappear on not less thanone of} the largest^panels of^{the packagein whichcigarettes or any other}

¶765

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶766

tobacco products have been packed for distribution, sale or supply for a valuable consideration.

¶767

(5) No person shall, directly or indirectly, produce, supply or distribute cigarettes or any other tobacco products unless every package of cigarettes or any other tobacco products produced, supplied or distributed by him indicates thereon, or on its label, the nicotine and tar contents on each cigarette or as the case may be on other tobacco products along with the maximum permissible limits thereof: Provided that the nicotine and tar contents shall not exceed the maximum permissible quantity thereof as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act."

¶768

RELEVANT PROVISIONS UNDBR F.S.S. Act:

¶769

"58.^Penalty for contraventions for which no specific penalty is provided.-Whoever contravenes any provisions of this Act or the rules or regulations made thereunder, for the contravention of which no penalty has been separately provided in this Chapter, shall be liable to a penalty which may exrend to two lakl-r rupees."

¶770

"59. Punishment for unsafe food.-Any person who, whether by himself or by any other person on his behalf, manufacrures for sale or stores or sells or distribtte-tY iinports any article of food for human consumption which is unsafe, shall be punishable,-

¶771

(i) where such failure or contravention does not result in injury. with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months and also with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees; (ii) where such failure or contravention results in a non-grievous injury, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and also with fine which miy extend to tfuee lakh rupees: (iii) where such failure or contravention results in a grievous injury, with imprisonment lor a term which may extend to six years and also with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees; (iv) where such failure or contravention results in death, with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and also with fine which shall not be less than ten lakh rupees.,,

¶772

¶773

KL,J Ctl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶774

II,ELEVANT PROVISION UNDER E.D. ACT:

¶775

"3. Penalty. Any^person disobeying any regulation or order made under this Act shall be deemed to have committed an offence punishable under section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (4s of 1860 )."

¶776

IIELEVANT PROVISION UNDER D.M. ACT:

¶777

"51. Punishment for obstruction, etc.-

¶778

(l) Whoever, without reasonable cause- (1) Whoever, without

¶779

reasonable cause-rr

¶780

(a) obstructs any officer or employee of the Central Govemment or the State Government, or a person authorised by the National Aurhority or State Authority or District Authority in the discharge of his functions under this Act; or

¶781

(b) refuses to comply with any direction given by or on behalf of the Central Covemment or the State Govemment or the National Executive Committee or the State Executive Committee or the District Authority under this Act, shall on conviction be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine, or with both, and if such obstruction or refusal to comply with directions results in loss of lives or imminent danger thereof, shall on conviction be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years. notes on clauses Clauses 51 to 58^(Secs. 51 to 58) seeks to lay down what will coniiitifean offence in terms of obstruction of the functions under the Act, false claim for relief, m isappropriation of relief material or funds, issuance of false r.varning, failure of an officer to perform the duty imposed on him under the Act without due^permission or lawful excuse, or his connivance at contravention of the provisions of the^Act. The clauses also provide for penalties for these offences."

¶782

The /rs involved in the present petitions is no more res integra. A learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra^Pradesh in Chidurala Shyamsubder v. State of Telanganaa had an occasion to deal with the issues involved in the present criminal petitions. Atter refering to various provisions of IPC, FSS Act, COTP Act and also the principle laid down by the Apex Court and otl'rer High Courts

¶783

Crl.l'. No.373l ol20l8 & batch, decided on 27.08.2018

¶784

KLJ CrL? No.l52^of 2020 & batch

¶785

in several^{judgments, the leamed SingleJudgehad framedthe issues,}

¶786

which are as under:

¶787

"l) Whether the^{respondent/ Sub-lnspector of Police, is competent to} investigate into the offence^{punishableunder Sections54 and 59(l)ol} FSS Act?

¶788

1. Whether the^{petitioners in all the petitionsare found committing any} act with malicious^{intention,with kirowledge and reasonto believe that} such act likely to spread^{the infectionof any diseasedangerous to life?} And whether the^{petitioners sellingor offering or exposingfor sale as} food or drink, any article^{which has been renderedor has become} noxious or is in a state unfit for^{foodor drink or reason to believe that} the same is noxious as food^{or drink? If so, are they liableto be} proceeded for the offence^{punishableunderSections270 and 273} IPC.?"

¶789

After an elaborate^{discussionand on consideration ol} various aspects, the leamed Single Judge^{has held that the police} cannot take cognizance of the offence, to^{investigateinto and file} charge sheet against the^{accusedtherein for the offencepunishable} under sections - 54 and 59 fii'"i1is Act,^{as they were not} empowered under the said Act to^{launch the prosecution,but only} Food Safety Officer appointed by^{the Govemment alone is competent} to launch prosecution for those^{two offences. Withthe said findings,} the leamed Single Judge has^{quashedthe proceedingswherethe} offences are under Sections^{- 54 and 59 of FSS Act initiated by the} police.

¶790

In the very same^{judgment,the leamed Single Judge further} held that chewing tobacco^{and khainiare not the 'food' within the} definition of Section - 3O of^{the FSSAct andthe manufacture,saleor}

¶791

¶792

KL,J Crl.P. No.)52 of202A^{& batch}

¶793

exposing for sale of tobacco^{etc., is govemed by the provisionsof} COTP Act, but not by^{FSS Act and so alsothe provisions of IPC'The} respondents - police are^{incompetent to investigate the offence} punishable under Sections - 54^and 59^{(1) of the FSS Act and} allegations in the charge^{sheet coupled with the statements do not} disclose the commission^{of the offence punishable under Section - 273} of IPC since transportation of^{noxious food is not included under} Section - 273 of IPC.^{The act doneby the accused therein i'e',} transportation of khaini^{and chewing tobacco though dangerous to} hurnan life, it woutd not^{spread or infect or cause any disease on} account of transportation^and if^{those productsare consumed by} human being, it would^{certainly cause} .^{damage to the health'} Therefore, transportation of^{khaini or chewing tobacco by itself is not} an oflence under Section^{- 270 of'lPCl'TanMasalais not a tobacco} product to fatt within the^purview of^{COTP Act.Therefore,the} provisions of the COTP Act have^{no application, thereby registration} of crirne on the ground of^{violation of Sections- 7 (l) (2) (3) (5) and} Section - 26 of COTP^{Act is an illegality.The leamed SingleJudge} lurther held that registration^{of casesfor the offence under Section-} 20 (2) read with 7⁽²⁾ of^{COTPAct is illegal. With the saidfindings'} the learned Single Judge^{has quashedthe crimes and calendarcasesin} the said^judgment.

¶794

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 oJ2020 & batch

¶795

In Sri Jaganath Enterprises Eluru Vasadhi Tripati Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradeshs, a leamed Single Judge of the High court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaralti had also an occasion to deal with the said issue. After referring to the contentions of the respective parties therein, various provisions of IpC, FSS Act, COTp Act and relying on the principle laid down in Anand Ramdhani Chaurasia3, Joseph Kurian v. State of Kerala6, Sayyed Hassan Sayyed Subhanr, M/s. Pepsico India Holdings (pvt) Ltd., v. State of U.p.7. Sanjay Anjay Stores v. Union of Indias, Boop Singh Tyagi r,. Statce, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lall0 and Chidurala Shyamsubdera, the leamed Single Judge has quashed the FIRs / calendar cases. The leamed Single Judge referring to the raw laid down in Chidurala Shyamsubdera held that despite the said authoritative pronouncement of law, status quo continues. The said judgment attained finality. fr"n th.nffi" police are registering cases against accused on the very same allegations for the very same offences.

¶796

i) Referring to the provisions of Sections _ i53, lgg, 269,270, 271, 272, 273, 284, 328, 353 of IpC, the leamed Judge in Sri Jaganath Enterprisess held that the offences registered under the said sections are not maintainable. It fuither held that the provisions of the COTP Act can only be pressed into service in the limited

¶797

5 . 2020 (l) ALr (crl.) 215 (APHC)

¶798

1995 (l) SCJ 277

¶799

201I (2) Crimes 250 8. 2017 SCC Online Cal 16323 9. 2002 c .L.J. 2872 '0.^{I992 Supp (l)} SCC 335

¶800

¶801

KL,J Ctl.P. No.l52 of2020 & botch

¶802

circun'lstances only where there is violation ofSections 4,5,6,7 and 10 olthe COTP Act. By referring to the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Bhajan Lalr0 and M/s. Pepsico India Holdings (Pvt) Ltd.7, the leamed Single Judge has quashed the proceedings in various crimes / calendar cases.

¶803

Another leamed Single Judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesl.r at Amaravati in V. Nageswara Rao v. State of Andh ra Pradeshrr had also an occasion to deal with the said issue and agreed with the principle laid down in Chidurala Shyamsubdera.

¶804

I 3. In Sayyed Hassan Sayyed Subhanr, the Apex Court while dealing with legality of the order passed by the Bombay High Court in a batch of criminal writ petitions and criminal applications, which were flled challenging the registration of FIRs for the offences under Sections - 188,272,,273 utd 328 of IPC and Sections - 26 and 30 of the FSS Act where there is an allegation of transportation and sale of GLrtka / Pan Masala etc., held that the^judgment of Bombay High Court is contrary to the provisions of the Act and law laid down by it. With the said finding, the Apex Court remitted the matter to the Bombay High Court for fresh consideration on the issue that whether the aibresaid offences are made out in the FIRs, which are subject rratter of the cases pending before the Bombay High Court.

¶805

rr. 2020 Supreme (AP) 348

¶806

KL.J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & borch

¶807

In view of the authoritative pronouncement of law in the aforesaid^judgments, as discussed above, coming to the facts of the cases on hand, the allegations against the accused in respective cases are transportation, possession, storage, sale and purchase of banned products viz., tobacco / tambaku I gutka I khaini / zarda / pan masala etc., respectively. In Chidurala Shyamsubdera, the teamed Single observed that transportation of chewing tobacco or khaini or pan masala do not constitute an offence punishable under Section -270 of IPC and that manufacturing of pan masala is not included in Section - 273 of IPC and, therefore, the same is not an offence since it is not a noxious food. The leamed Single Judge has further observed in the said^judgment which is as under:

¶808

"....The act done by the petitioners i.e., transportation ol khaini and cherving tobacco though dangerous to human life, it would not spread or infect or cause aiiy dffiaie on account of transportation and if those products are consumed by human being, it would certainly cause damage to the health. Therefore, transportation of khaini or chewing tobacco is not by itself is not an offence under Section - 270 of IPC and it would fall within Section 270 of IPC."

¶809

Section - 272 of IPC makes punishable an offence by a person, who adulterates any article of food or drink. Therefore, the said section would only come into play if food or drink is adulterated. There is no definition of 'adulteration' in IPC. The definition of 'adulterant' is found in the provisions of the FSS Act. Section - 3 (l)

¶810

¶811

KL'J Crl.P. No.)52 of2020 & batch

¶812

(a) of the FSS Act deals with 'adulterant' which means a material rvhich could make the 'food' unsafe or sub-standard or mis-branded. According to Section - 272 of IPC, if a material is used to make the lood unsafe/sub-standard or mis-branded, then only the offence would be attracted. Whereas, as discussed supra, the allegation in the plesent batch of cases is with regard to transportation, possession, storage, sale and purchase of banned products viz., tobacco / tambaku / gutka / khaini I zarda / pan masala etc., respectively. Therefore, according to this Court, the said allegation does not fall within the anrbit of Section - 272 of IPC. Therefore, I agree with the^principle laid down by the leamed Single Judges of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Chidurala Shyamsubdern, S.i Jaganath Enterprisess and V, Nageswara RaolI.

¶813

t6. In Joseph Kurian6, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that lor Section - 272lPC to be attracted, the following should be^present. ( l) That the article involved was food and drink meant to be cousumed by live persons; (2) that the accused adulterated it^{and the} adulteration rendered it noxious as a 'food or drink';^{(3) that the} accused knew at the time of adulteration that he^would sell^{the article} as food or drink and knew that such article cannot be sold^{as food or} drinh. The Hon'ble Supreme Court clearly held that^{the offenceis} completed on the introduction of the adulterant. 'Adulterant'^would tnean that a material which is mixed to make the 'food'^{unsafe or} drink unsafe. In the^present case on hand, tobacco^{is not a food or}

¶814

Crl.P. No.l52^{of2020 & batcit}

¶815

drink and^{what is stated to be mixed in it is not clearly established by} any cogent^{material as an 'adulterant'for the offenceunder Section-} 272lPcto^be Pressed^{into service'}

¶816

As^{far as Section- 328 of IPC is concemed' in thesame} judgment it was held^{as follows:}

¶817

"10. In^{order to prove offenceunder Section328 theprosecutionis} required^{to prove thatthe substance in question was a poison' or any} stupefying,^{intoxicating or unwholesomedrug etc' that the accused} adrninistered^{thesubstance to the complainantor causedthe} complainant^{to take such substance' that he did so with intentto cause} hurt or knowing^{it to be likely 19 that he would thereby causehurt'or} with the intention^{to commitor facilitatethe commission of an offence'} It is, therefore,^{essentialfor the prosecution to prove that the accused} was directly^{responsible for administering poisonetc' or causing it to} be taken^{by any person, tkoughanother' ' '' '"}

¶818

Tobacco^{does not fit into this definition'}

¶819

Section -^{273 of IPCdealswith sale of a noxious foodor} drink, and^{as per which, whoever sells' or offersor exposesfor sale'} as food^{or drink,any article which has beenrendered or has become} noxious,^{or is in a state unflt for food or drink, knowingor having} reason to^{believe that the same is noxiousas food or drink' shallbe} punished with^{imprisonment specifiedtherein' Therefore'if a person} offers for^{sale a "food or drink"anyarticlewhichhas becomenoxious} or is in a^{state of unfit for "food or drinK''Thus' the said section} would apply,^{when an ar:ticlewhich has becomenoxious or whichhas} been rendered^{noxious' It alsoappiies to food or drink only' As held} in Sri Jaganath^{Enterprisess, the word 'noxious' is not definedin}

¶820

¶821

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 o[2020 & botch

¶822

IPC or in FSS Act. As per the dictionary meaning, the word 'noxious' is harnrful, deleterious, injurious, poisonous etc. As stated above, the allegation in the entire batch of present criminal petitions is with regard to transportation, possession, storage, sale and purchase of banned products viz., tobacco / tambaku I gutka lkhaini / zarda I pan rrasala etc., respectively. Therefore, according to this Court, the contents of the complaint/charge sheet lacks the ingredients of Section - 273 ofIPC.

¶823

As far as section - 188 IPC is concerned , as per the settled larv on the subject, before an accused is charged, there must be; an order duly promulgated by the public servant; the public servant must have the lawful authority to promulgate the order; the person flouting the same should have knowledge 3!og!t!e order directing him to abstain from the act; he must disobey the said order with the lcnowledge; and such disobedience of the duly promulgated order should cause a danger to the human life etc. In Boop Singh Tyagie a Division Bench of Allahabad High Court held that right to promulgate the ordinance/order is also an issue which is being raised, because under the FSS Act, the Commissioner of Food Safety alone has the authority to pass the orders only if the article of.food, can causes danger or is injurious to health.

¶824

KL.J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶825

In N.T. Rama Rao v. The State of A.P., rep. by Public Prosecutorl2 while dealing with the offences under Sections - 188 and 283 of IPC, the leamed Single Judge of the combined High Court ofAndhra Pradesh held as under:

¶826

"5) Even if the allegation that the petitioner conducted public meetings at three road^junctions contrary to the permission accorded for conducting of a public meeting only at one specified^{place is} true, such a direction under Section 30 of the Police Act, 1861 could have been^given only by the Superintendent or the Assistant Superinteudent of Police of the District but not by any of their subordinates. If such a^permission is^granted under Section 30 of the Police Act, 1861 and is violated, Section 195 (1) (a) of Code of Criminal Procedure mandates that the complaint in this regard has to be made by the public servant concerned or some other person to whom such a public servant i5 adminigtJa[r$ly subordinate to enable any Court to take cognizance of an^oflence under Section 188 of Code of Criminal^Procedure. In the present case, the charge^{sheetwas filedby} the Sub Inspector of Police,^{who could nothave} been the authority to^{grant permissionfor the} pubtic meeting and therefore, the complaint/charge sheet is in violation of^{the mandatoryprovision of} Section 195(1)(a) ofCode^{of CrintinalProcedure.}

¶827

That apart, the^{offence alleged to havebeen} committed under Section^{283 of the IndianPenal} Code by the^{petitioners and othersis obviously in} consequence to the alleged^{offence underSection} 188 of indian Penal Code and^{is not an}

¶828

criminal Petition No.5323 of2009, decided on 17.09.2009

¶829

¶830

KL,J Crl.P, No.152 o/2020 & batch

¶831

independent of the same. Even otherwise, the conduct of public meeting at three road^junctions or obstruction to the traffic could not have been considered as causing any danger or injury to any person. In so far as the obstruction in any public way is concerned, which can also be covered by Section 283 of the Indian Penal Code, the charge sheet cites only one witness to speak about the traffic^jam caused by the road show. But,^when the conduct of the public meeting at least at one place has been permitted and if the gathering for that public meeting resulted in any inconvenience by way ol obstructing the traffic, the^{same cannot} be considered to be with necessary^grtilly mens rea to construe the existence of an ollence^punishable under Indian Penal Code. Under^the circumstances, none ol the offences alleged^canbe said to have any reasonable basis and in any^view, the complainVcharge shee_t . bgqg _ in^violationof Section I 95 ( 1) (a) of Code of Criminal^Procedure, has to fail.

¶832

As the complaint has failed due to^its unsustainabilily, the^proceedings in^{their entirety} have to fail, though the l't accused^alone approached this Court by way of this Criminal Petition."

¶833

21 . In Thota Chandra Sekhar v. The^{State of Andhra}

¶834

Pradesh, through S,H.O., P.S. Eluru Rural,^{West Godavari} Districtr3, wherein by relying on^{variousjudgmentsincludingN.T'} Rama Raor2 and also the^{guidelineslaid down by the Apex Courtin} Bhajan Lalr0 more particularly,^{guidelineNo.6, which saysthat}

¶835

''.^{CrinrinalPetitionNo.I 5248 of 20I 6, decided on 26.10.2016}

¶836

crt.p. No.tj2 oI2020 e {o;cll

¶837

where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concemed Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the code or the concemed Act, providing efficacious remedy to redress the grievance of the party, it was held that the proceedings in the said C.C. were quashed by exercising power under Section _ 4g2 of Cr.p.C. It was also further held that the proceedings shall not be continued due to technical defect of obtaining prior permission under Section _ 155 (2) of Cr.p.C. and taking cognizance on the complaint fired by v.R.o. and it is against the purport of Section _ 19s (1) (a) of Cr.p.C.

¶838

22.^yide Notification No.50l/FSS_l/2020, dated 06.01.2020, the commissioner of Food Safety, Telangana Directorate of Institute of Preventive Medicine, public Health Labs and Food (Health) Administration, Narayanguda, Hydi;;-;stricted the manufacture, storage, distribution, transportation and sale of gutka / pan masala, which contains tobacco and nicotine, as ingredients and chewing tobacco products, like chap tobacco, pure tobacco, khaini, kharra, scented tobacco / flavoured tobacco or by whatever name locally it is called packed in sachets / pouches / package in the entire Stage of Telangana under FSS Act,2006. It is for one year. Vide Notification No.505/FSS-1/2021, dated O6.Ol.2)2l,the same was exrended for one more year. As per the information fumished and instructions received, several writ petitions were filed challenging the said

¶839

¶840

KL,J Crl.P. No.152 of2020 & batch

¶841

Notifications before this Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court. A Division Bench of this Court declined to entertain some writ petitions on the ground that the Hon'ble Supreme Court seized of the said issue. It is also relevant to note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court renranded back the matter to this Court. Therefore, such a notification can only be issued for emergency situations and for prohibiting the distribution and sale of any article of a food cannot be lost sight of. Therefore, in view of the law laid down in the above judgments including the judgments in Chidurala Shyamsubder4, Sri Jaganath Enterprisess and V. Nageswara Raotl. According to this Court, Section - 188 of IPC will not attract to the allegations leveled against the petitioners herein in this batch of criminal petitions.

¶842

As far as Section - 328 of IPC is concemed, it deals with causing hurt by means of poison, etc., with intent to commit an oftence. As per the said provision, whoever administers to or causes to be taken by any person any poison or any stupefring, intoxicating or unwholesome drug, or other thing with intent to cause hurt to such person. or with intent to commit or to facilitate the commission of an off-ence or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which rnay exlend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Therefore, there should be administeling poison, intoxicating etc., with intent to cause huft to such person or with intent to commit or to facilitate the comrnission of an offence or knowing it to be likely that he will

¶843

Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & barch

¶844

thereby cause hurt. As^{stated above, the allegationsin the entire batch} of criminal^petitions are^{lacking. Therefore, accordingto this Court,} the contents ofthe complaints /^{chargesheetslacks the ingredientsof} Section - 328 of IPC.

¶845

As far as Section - 336 of IPC is concerned,^{it deals with an} act endangering life or personal safety of others,^{and as per which,} whoever does any act so rashly or negligently^{as to endanger human} life or the personal safety of others, shall^{be punished with implis-} onment of either description for a term^{which may extend to three} months, or with fine which may^extend to^{two hundredand fifty} rupees, or with both. In the complaints /^{chargesheets, there is no} such allegation of rash and negligent^{act which endangershumanlife} or personal safety of others. Therefore, according^{to this Court,the} contents of the complaints / charge sheets^{lacksthe ingledients of} Section - 336 of iPC.

¶846

As far as Section - 420 of IPC is concemed, it deals^with Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.^{There is no} such inducement either at the inception or at a later stage. Thus, the contents of complaints / charge sheet lack the ingredients of Section^- 420 of IPC.

¶847

As far as Section - 269 of IPC is concerned, it^{deals tvith} negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life. and as per which, whoever unlawfully or negligently does^{any act}

¶848

¶849

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & barch

¶850

which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe to be, likely to spread the infection ofany disease dangerous to life, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with f,ine, or with both. But, a perusal of the contents of complaints I charge sheets in the present batch of cases, such ingredients are lacking and, therefore, Section - 269 ofIPC does not alise in the present batch of cases.

¶851

In view of the above said discussion, according to this Court, transportation, possession, storage, sale and purchase of tobacco products are not totally banned in the State of Telangana and also in the Country. Therefore, it cannot be said that Sections - 269, 270, 27l, 272 and 273, 328,336 and 420 of IPC are attracted to the cases in this batch.

¶852

As far as the offences under FSS Act is concemed, as already discussed above, in Chidurala Shyamsubdera, the learned Single Judge following the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bhajan Lalro held that the police are incompetent to take cognizance ofthe offences punishable under Sections - 54 and 59 (l) of the FSS Act, investigating into the offences along with other offences under the provisions of the IPC. It was further held that filing charge sheet is a grave illegality, as the Food Safety Officer alone is competent to investigate and to file charge sheet following the Rules laid down under Sections - 41 and 42 of FSS Act. In the present case, the police have registered the crime for the offences

¶853

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶854

under Sections - 188,270 and 273^of IPC.^{Therefore, in the present} batch ofcases, entertaining the complaints / filing^{the chargesheets} by the police is contrary to the principle laid down in Chidurala Shyamsubdera.

¶855

With regard to the offences under COTP Act, it is relevant to mention the objects and the reasons of the said Act itself clearll' state that the act is meant to prohibit the advertisement of, and to provide for the regulation of trade and commerce in. and production, supply and distribution of, cigarettes and other tobacco^{products and} for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. A reading ol the said objects of the said Act would reveal that a total ban of tobacco products was not envisaged by the said Act. The Parliament merell, felt it expedient to control the advertisement and sale of tobacco products. As noted earlier in the order, Section - 3 (p) of the COTP Act and the schedule therein define tobacco products. Pan masala. gutkha and chewing tobacco are included in the definition of tobacco products. Section - 5 of the COTP Act deals with prohibition of advertisement of cigarette and other tobacco products only. No person, who is engaged in the production, supply or distribution of cigarettes or other products shail advertise the same. Similarly, no person having the control over a medium can adveftise cigarettes or tobacco products, and no person shatl be a part ofany advertisement.

¶856

Section - 7 of the COTP Act deals with the imposition of restriction on the sale, trade, commerce of tobacco products unless

¶857

¶858

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶859

every package of cigarette or tobacco product contains a specified warning (pictorial or otherwise). Section - 4 of the COTP Act, bans smoking in public places. In addition, Section - 6 of the COTP Act, prohibits the sale of cigarettes or other tobacco products to a person who is under the age of 18 years are in an area within 100 yards of any educaLional institution.

¶860

3l. A reading of this Act, parlicularly Sections - 4, 5, 6 and 7 clearly shows that there is no general ban or general prohibition on the manufacture/sale of tobacco products. 22 What is barred is merely the sale ol these products to a person, who is below the age of 18 years and in an area within 100 yards of an educational institution. The other aspects covered by Sections - 5 and 7 of the COTP Act, deal r.r,ith the adveftisement and the wan!n&!ich is to be contained on a package, in which the tobacco product is packed. This is a regulatory rrechanism only. Therefore, according to this Court, the above said allegations of transporlation, possession, storage, sale and purchase of banned tobacco products will not attract the offence under Section -7 olthe COTP Act"

¶861

As far as Section - 20 (2) of the COTP Act is concemed,^as stated above, the allegations against the petitioner in respective con-rplaints / charge sheets are that they were transpofting, possessing, storing, selling and purchasing the banned tobacco^products to^the clrstomers illegally in ordel to gain wrongful profits. In vierv ol^the said allegation, it is apt to refer to Section - 20⁽²⁾ of the COTP^Act

¶862

KI-,.J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & barch

¶863

for better appreciation of the case and to decide the issue in question.

¶864

and the same is as under:

¶865

"20, Punishment for failure to give specified warning and nicotine and tar contents.(1)...

¶866

(2) Any person who sells or distributes cigarettes or tobacco products which do.not contain either on the package or on their label, the specified waming and the nicotine and tar contents shall in the case of first conviction be punishable with imprisonment for a term, which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both, and, for the second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment for a term whiuh may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to three thousand rupees."

¶867

Thus, Section - 20 of COTP Act deals with punishment for

¶868

failure to give specified waming and nicotine and tar contents. But, in the complaints / charge sheets, there is no allegation against the petitioners that they were carry. i.ngi^on^. trade or commerce in contraband or any other tobacco products without label and specified warning on the said products. In view of the same, the contents of the complaints I charge sheets lack the ingredients of Section - 20 (2) of the COTP Act. Even, there is no allegation that the seized products do not contain labels with statutory warning. Thus, registering the crimes for the said offence against the petitioners is not only contrary to Section - 20 (2) of COTP Act, but also contrary ro the principle Iaid down in Chidurala Shyamsubdera. in view of the same, the ollence under Section - 20 (2) of COTP Act is also liable to be quashed against the petitioners. I once again reiterate that I agree with the

¶869

¶870

KL,J Crl.P. No.l52 of2020 & batch

¶871

plincipte laid down by the leamed Single Judges of the High Court of Andhra Practesh in Chidurala Shyamsubdera, Sri Jaganath Enterprisess and V. Nageswara Raoll.

¶872

For the foregoing discussion and the authoritative^principle o1' Iarv, Criminal Petition Nos. 3768, 3879, 4046, 4077,^4098,4099, 1r00. 4102, 4141, 4t5t, 4157, 4182, 4187, 4247, 4249,^{4251, 4258,} 4262, 4277, 4405, 4415, 4542, 4615, 4640, 4681,^{4727, 4775 and} 4825 of 2021 are allowed quashing the proceedings^{against the} petitioners therein in the respective crimes mentioned therein.^Since the proceedings in the aforesaid Criminal Petitions are^quashed against the respective petitioners, the respective Station^House Officers / Investigating Officers are hereby directed to^returnthe seized property / vehicles on propel.idggljfication and^{verificationof} oq,nership under due acknowledgment.

¶873

Further, Criminal Petition Nos. 152,^{153, 155, 162 & 5826} of 2020,3498, 3500, 3509,3514, 4070,^{4110, 4119, 4140, 4178,} 1194, 4216, 4230, 4361, 4612, 4622 and⁴⁶³² of^{2021 are also} allowed quashing the proceedings against the^{petitioners thereinin the} respective Calendar Cases mentioned therein.^{Since the proceedings} are quashed, the respective petitioners are^{at liberty to file appropriate} applications before the concerned Magistrate^{for retumof the seized} propefty / vehicle and the Magistrate shall^{considerthe same in} accordance with law.

¶874

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in all the

¶875

Criminal Petitions shali stand closed.

¶876

SD/. I.NAGA LAKSI1MI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

One Fair Copy to the Hon'ble Sri Justice K. LAKSHMAN

¶881

(For His Lordships kind perusal)

¶882

'1 . The First Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Warangal.

¶883

The Station House Officer, lntezargunj Police Station, Warangal Commissionerate.

¶884

The Station House Officer, Musheerabad Police Station, Hyderabad District.

¶885

The Xl Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, at Secunderabad.

¶886

The Station House Officer, Bowenpally Police Station, Hyderabad District.

¶887

The Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Devarakonda, Nalgonda District

¶888

The Station House Officer, Devarakonda Police Station, Nalgonda District.

¶889

The Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Miryalguda, Nalgonda District.

¶890

The Station House Officer, Miryalguda ll Town Police Station Nalgonda District.

¶891

10.The XXV Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad, at lbrahimpatnam, Rachakonda, Ranga Reddy District.

¶892

1 1 . The Station House Officer, lbrahimpatnam, Police Station Rachakonda Com m issionerate.

¶893

12.The Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Gajwel.

¶894

13.The Station House Officer, Manoharabad Police Station, Medak District.

¶895

'l4.The Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Nirmal.

¶896

15.The Station House Officer, Kadam Police Station, Nirmal District.

¶897

The Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Adilabad.

¶898

17.The Station House Officer, Adilabad lTown Polieer8tation, Adilabad District.

¶899

1 B. The Principal Judicial First Class Magistraie, at Gajwel, Medak District.

¶900

'l 9. The Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Sirpur (Town).

¶901

20.The Station House Officer, Easgoan Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶902

21 . The Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at Nirmal.

¶903

22.The Station House Officer, Nirmal Town, Police Station, at Nirmal District.

¶904

23.The station House officer, Koutala Police station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶905

The Station House Officer, Kukatpally Police Station Cyberabad District.

¶906

25.The Principal Junior civil Judge cum vlll Additional Metropolitan lvlagistrate, Cyberabad, at Kukatpally.

¶907

26.The Station House officer, Adilabad Rural police station, Adilabad District.

¶908

The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at Adilabad.

¶909

The Station House Officer, Talamadugu police Station Adilabad District.

¶910

29.The lV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate -cum- lV Additional Junior civil Judge, at L.B. Nagar, Ranga Reddy Djstrict.

¶911

The station House officer, Ghatkeshwar police Station, Rachakonda District.

¶912

31.The Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Zaheerabad.

¶913

The Station House Officer, Chiragpally Police Station, Sangareddy District.

¶914

The Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Ramannapet.

¶915

The Station House officer, choutuppal police station Rachakonda District.

¶916

The Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Ramannapeta.

¶917

36.The station House officer, chityal (NLG) police station, Nalgonda District.

¶918

37.The I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Khammam.

¶919

38.The station House officer, Khammam lrown police station, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶920

^,39.The lll Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Khammam.

¶921

40.The Station House Officer, Raghunadhapalem^{PoliceStation,Khammam District.}

¶922

41 .The ll Additional Judicial First Class l/agistrate, at [/lancherial.

¶923

42.The Station House Officer, l/ancherial Town Police Station Ramagundam District.

¶924

43.The XVll Additional Chief tVletropolitan lt/agistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶925

44.The Station House Officer, Golconda Police Station, Hyderabad District.

¶926

45.The Principal Judicial First Class lt4agistrate (PDtt/), at Khammam.

¶927

The Station House Officer, Thirumalayapalem Police Station, Khammam District.

¶928

47.The Station House Officer, Police Station Adilabad ll Town Police Station, Adilabad District.

¶929

48.The XXIV Additional Metropolitan lVlagistrate, Rachakonda, at Hayatnagar.

¶930

49.The Station House Officer, Abdullapurmet Police Station, Rachakonda District.

¶931

The Additional Judicial lvlagistrate of First Class, at Asifabad.

¶932

51.The Station House Officer, Rebbena Police Station, Asifabad District.

¶933

The Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Nalgonda.

¶934

53.The Station House Officer, Nalgonda lTown Police Station Nalgonda District.

¶935

The Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (For Prohibition and Excise Offences), at Nalgonda.

¶936

55.The Station House Officer, Nalgonda llTown Police Station, Nalgonda District.

¶937

56.The lll Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Kothagudem.

¶938

The Station House Officer, Kothagudem lll Town Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶939

The Station House Officer, Khanaur Police Station, Nirmal District.

¶940

The Station House Officer, Sarangapur Police Station Nlrmal District.

¶941

60.The Station House Officer, Mamda Police Station, at Nirmal District.

¶942

6'1 . The Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Nidamanoor, Nalgonda District.

¶943

62.The Station House Officer, Peddavoora Police Station, Nalgonda District.

¶944

63.The Station House Officer, Adibatla Police Station, lbrahimpatnam Rachakonda Co m m issio nerate.

¶945

64.The ll Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Khammam.

¶946

65.The Station House Officer, Khammam (R) Pp{ieStation, Khammam District.

¶947

The I Additional Judicial Magistrate of FirsiClass, at Jagtial.

¶948

67.The Special Magistrate of ll Class, Jagtial.

¶949

The Station House Officer, Dharmapuri Police Station, Jagitial District.

¶950

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad louTl

¶951

One CC to Sri M. A. K. Mukheed, Advocate [OPUCj

¶952

One CC to Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala, Advocate [OPUC]

¶953

72.One CC to Sri K. Surender, Advocate [OPUC]

¶954

One CC to Sri Gajanand Chakravarthi, Advocate [OPUC]

¶955

74.One CC to lr//s P. Radhika, Advocate [OPUC]

¶956

One CC to Sri Srinivas Reddy Balakisti, Advocate [OPUC]

¶957

One CC to M/s C. Sunitha Kumari, Advocate [OPUC] 77 .One CC to IV/s S. tril. Subhan, Advocate [OPUC]

¶958

One CC to Sri Kondadi Ajay Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶959

One CC to Sri S. Chandrasekhar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶960

One CC to Sri V. Yadu Krishna Sainath, Advocate [OPUC] B'l . One CC to lr//s N. Arthi, Advocate [OPUC] 82.One CC to Sri Y. Bala Murali, Advocate IOPUC] 83.One CC to Sri Boggula Raju, Advocate [OPUC]

¶961

84.11 LR Copies

¶962

85.The Under Secretary, Union of lndia Ministry of law, Justice and Company Affairs, New Delhi.

¶963

86.The Secretary Advocates Association (TG) Library, Hig h Court Buildings Hyderabad 87.Two CD^CoPies 88.One^{SPare CoPY} IMIMK . gbr

] I

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0510712021

1 $E ST4 14:
c,JJ
22 lut2021
.b
oi
*
F.sPATc

¶968

COMMON ORDER

¶969

CRLP.Nos.152, 153, 155, 162 and 5826o1 2020 and 3498,3500,3509, 3514,3768, 3879, 4046, 4070, 4077 ,4098, 4099, 4100, 4102, 4110, 4115, 4140, 414't, 4151, 4157 , 4178,4182,4187, 4194,4216,4230,4247,4249,4251,4258,4262,4277,4361, 4405, 4415, 4542, 46'12, 4615, 4622, 4632, 4640, 4681, 4727, 4775 and 4825 of 2021

¶970

ALLOWING ALL THE CRIMINAL PETITIONS

¶971

Mohd. Jameel v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Jameel v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ichapuram Sai Krishana Chaitanya Vs Union of India and 4 others

Dr. N.B. Ramaiah Vs The State of Telangana and 10 Others

Smt.CheelaManemma Vs The State of Telangana

Bukka Ramesh Vs The State of Telangana

Manikanta Rathod Vs The State of Telangana

Purushotham Mishra Vs The State of Telangana and Another