Allowed

Shaik Salman and 2 Others v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Jul 2021CRLP/5172/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. allowed criminal petition to quash proceedings in Crime No. 90 of 2021. Court held allegations of possessing/selling prohibited tobacco products did not attract offence ingredients under IPC Sections 420, 328, 270, 273/511, as tobacco isn't totally banned. Ordered return of seized property.

What did the court decide?

Quashed proceedings in Crime No. 90 of 2021 and directed SHO to return seized property to petitioners upon verification.

Shaik Salman and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY

¶3

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K,LAKSHMAN

¶6

CRIMI NAL PETITION NO: s172 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 . Shaik Salman, S/o. Shaik Azeem, Aged about 25^{years, Occ. Business,} Rl/o.Tatiguda Village IMandal, Adilabad District.

¶9

Shaik Nisar, S/o. Shaik Jafer, Aged about^{22years, Occ. Business' Ri/o.Tatiguda} Village and Mandal, Adilabad District.

¶10

Sam'iulla Khan, S/o' Ajamathulla^{Khan, Aged about 39 years, O99 Owner of} Aslam General Store, R/o.H.No. 3-3-198, Adilabad^{Town, Adilabad District'} ..,PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1^{TO 3}

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O.^{Adilabad(ll) Town Police Station, Adilabad} District, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court,^Hyderabad.

¶13

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶14

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.^{praying thatin the circumstancesstated} in the l\rlemorandum of Grounds^of criminal^{Petition, the High courtmay be pleased} to call for the records relating to the^{case in Crime.No. 90 ol 2021 on the file of Police} Station, Adilabad (ll) Town^{Police Station, Adilabad District, and quashthe} proceedings in the above Crime.No. 90 of 2021,

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶16

Petition under section 482 oI Cr.P.C^{praying that in the circumstancesstated} in the Memorandum of Grounds^{of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased} to dispense with filing of the^{certified copy of the Crime No. 90 of 2021 of Adilabad (ll)} Town Police Station, Adilabad^District.

¶17

I.A. N O:2 OF 2021

¶18

Petition under section^{482 of cr.P.cpraying thatin the circumstancesstated} in the lt4emorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased} to direct the^police to^{return the seized material in CrimeNo.90 of 2021 oI Adilabad} (ll)Town Police Station, Adilabad District^{to the petitioner.}

¶19

This Petition coming on for^{hearing, upon perusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of criminal^{Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri GAJANAND} CHAKRAVARTHI, Advocate^{for the Petitioners and of the Public Prosecutoron behalf} of the Respondent.

¶20

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶21

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHNIAN CRIMINAL PETITION N0.5172 0F 2021

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

This petition is filed under Section - 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash the proceedings in Crime No.90 of 202 I pending on the file olAdilabad II Town Police Station. Adilabad District. The petitioners herein are accused Nos. I to 3 in the said cn me. The offences alleged against them ar.e under Section s - 420,, 328,270 and273 read with 5l I of IPC.

¶24

Heard Mr. Gajanand Chakravarthi, leamed counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public prosecutor appearing on behallof respondent - State.

¶25

This Court, by common order dated 05.07.2021 in Crl.p. No. 152 of 2020 and batch, has extensively dealt with the issue covered in the present criminal petition observing that transportation, possession, storage, sale and purchase of tobacco products are not totally banned in the State of Telangana and, therefore, it cannot be said that offences under Sections - 269,270,271,272 and 273,328, 336 and 420 of IPC are attracted to the petitioners therein. In the present case aiso, the allegations against the petitioners are that they are possessing and selling prohibited tobacco products and the contents of the complaint do not attract the ingredients of offences

¶26

¶27

¶28

under Sections - 420, 328,270^{and 273 read with 5.l1 of IPC and,} therefore, the proceedings against^{the petitioners in the above crime} are liable to be quashed.

¶29

The present Criminal^{Petitionis accordinglyallowed} quashing the proceedings in Crime No.90 of^{2021 pending on the file} of Adilabad II Town Police^{Station, Adilabad District,againstthe} petitioners - accused Nos. 1 to 3.

¶30

Since the proceedings are^{quashedagainst the petitionersin} the above crime, the Station^{HouseOfficer, AdilabadII TownPolice} Station, is hereby^{directed to return the seizedpropertyto the} petitioners on proper identification^{and verification of ownership} under due acknowledgment.

¶31

As a sequel, miscellaneous^{petitions,if any, pendingin the}

¶32

crirninal petition shall stand^closed.

¶33

Sd/-M.MANJULA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPYII )-/' SECTION OFFICER

¶34

To 1. The Station House Officer, Poliqe Station, Adilabad^(ll) Town, Adilabad District. (FlR No.90/21)

¶35

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad (OUT)

¶36

One CC to Sri Gajanand Chakravarthi, Advocate^(OPUC)

¶37

Two CD Copies

¶38

One Spare Copy

Kj.

*.-

HIGH COURT

DATED:0910712021

.";hl
(v
cf 23 rutts2l t,C
,/,
V:9

ORDER

CRLP.No.5172 of 2021

ALLowlNh THE CRL.P.

%l'+ 0

Shaik Salman and 2 Others v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik Salman and 2 Others v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Fareena Begum And 5 Others Vs The State of Telangan And Another

Somanaboina Kishan Vs The State of Telangana and another

Dharavath Basha Vs The State of Telangana through S.H.O.,Zaffergadh Police Station and another

Shaik Imthiyaz and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana

Durgam Varalakshmi Vs The State of Telangana

Rahul Bacchan Ray Vs The State of Telangana