Allowed

Chandra Shekar Erra , Shekar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC21 Dec 2022CRLP/181/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings against the petitioner. He was implicated in charges of cheating and violating the Seeds Act only based on a confession made by another accused while in police custody, with no spurious seeds recovered from the petitioner, thus violating principles of self-incrimination.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings against the petitioner in Criminal Case No.799 of 2021 were quashed.

Chandra Shekar Erra , Shekar Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER rWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 181 OF 2022

¶6

Between:

¶7

Chandra Shekar Erra @ Shekar, S/o. Prabhakar, Age.40 years, Occ. Business, Ri/o.Ponkal Village, Jannaram mandal, Mancherial District. T.S.

¶8

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.3

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High court of Judicature at Hyderabad.

¶11

2- The SHO, Jannaram Police Station, Mancherial District. T.S.

¶12

Panaganti Sangitha, Wo. Srikanth, Age. 28 yrs, Occ. Mandal Agriculture Officer of Jannaram Mandal, lvlancherial Distict, T.S.

¶13

...RESPONOENTS

¶14

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 Petitioner / accused No.3 in C.C.No.799 of 2021 on the file of the Learned Judicial First Class Magistrate at Adilabad, Adilabad District for the offences under Section 42O IPC and Section 19 of the Seeds Act, 1966, arose out of Crime.No. 107 of 2021, dt 29-06-2021 , issued by the SHO Jannaram P.S., tulancherial District

¶15

l.A. NO: 1OF 2022

¶16

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 Petitioner / accused No.3 in C.C.No.799 of 2021 on the file of the Learned Judicial First Class Magistrate at Adilabad, Adilabad Drstrict for the offences under Section 420 IPC and Section 19 of the Seeds Act, 1966, arose out of Crime.No. 107 ol 2021, dt 29-06-2021, issued by the SHO Jannaram P.S., Mancherial District, pending disposal of the quash petition

¶17

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri MR BOGGULA RAJU ,Advocate for the Petitioner and the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 & 2 an None Appeared for the Respondent No.3

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

Crl.Petition No.787 ot 2022

¶20

¶21

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶22

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.18 LOF 2022

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 4BZ of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short^'Cr.P.C.) by the^petitioner- tn Accused No.3 seeking to^quash the^proceedings against him C.C.No.799 of 2021 on the file of .ludicial First Class Magistrate at Adilabad, Adilabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC') and Section 19 ofSeeds Act, 1966.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner - Accused No.3 and Additional Public Prosecutor for the State - respondent. Perused the record.

¶26

The petitioner - Accused No.3 is questioning his implication in the charge sheet filed for the aforesaid offences.

¶27

It is the case of the prosecution that on 29.06.2021, Accused No.1 was apprehended while he was in possession of spurious cotton seeds and seized 35 packets of Pavani Spurious Cotton Seeds under the cover of panchanama. Thereafter, it is alleged that

¶28

crl-Petition No.181 0f 2022

¶29

¶30

Accused No.1 confessed regarding the involvement of Accused No.2 and this petitioner-Accused No.3 getting the seeds from Maharashtra State for the purpose of selling it to the farmers. The said seeds were seized and sent for analysis. The Seeds Analyst from the Seed Testing Laboratory, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, furnished a report stating that the seeds are "spurious cotton seeds".

¶31

Learned counsel for the^petitioner - Accused^{No.3 would} submit that in case of this^petitioner - Accused No.3, there is no seizure of any spurious seeds from his^possession and he^is implicated only on the basis of the confession made by Accused No.1 before the Police. Any confession made by accused in the presence of Police is hit under Section 24 to 27 of Indian Evidence Act and the said confession cannot be made basis to^prosecute this petitioner.

¶32

Sections 420 of IPC and 19 of Seeds Act, 1966 are extracted hereunder.

¶33

Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the^person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter 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

¶34

Crl.Petition No.lE1 of 2022

4 ! I I

I I

imprisonment of either^description for a term which^{may extend} to seven^years. and shall^{also be liable} to^fine.

¶39

Penalty.-If any person-

¶40

(a) contravenes any provision of this Act or any rule made thereunder; or

¶41

(b) prevenG a Seed Inspector from taking sample under this Act; or

¶42

(c) prevents a Seed Inspector from exercising any other power conferred on him by or under this Act, he shall, on conviction,^be punishable-

¶43

(i) for the first offence with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, and

¶44

(ii) in the event of such person having been previously convicted of an offence under this section, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

¶45

The charge sheet is filed against the Accused for the offence of cheating. The ingredients of cheating are that a false statement or misrepresentation has to be made known to be false. On the said misrepresentation, a person must have been induced, pursuant to which there should be delivery of property. Such acts of deceit are not stated as far as this petitioner is concerned.

¶46

B. To attract an offence under Section 19 of Seeds Act, 1966, one must have been in the possession of seeds which are spurious in nature. Since there is no recovery from this petitioner and the reason for his implication is the confession which is made by

¶47

Crl.Petition No.181 of 2022

¶48

¶49

Accused No.1, the proceedings against this petitioner - Accused No.3 are liable to be quashed.

¶50

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner - Accused No.3 in C.C.No.799 of 2021 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate at Adilabad,

¶51

Adilabad District, are hereby quashed.

¶52

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶53

Sd/. K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUECOPY// -trr.-.i1r\1.

¶54

SECTION OFFICER

¶55

To,

¶56

1 . The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Adilabad, Adilabad District. 2. The Station House Officer, Jannaram Police Station, Mancherial District. 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.(OUT)

¶57

4 One CC to SRl. MR BOGGULA RAJU, Advocate [OPUC]

¶58

Two CD Copies.

BSR

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 11212022

(t,..-<br>n'c!ll
(.b
ORDER
t{-
,t
,{i '
CRLP.No.181 of 2022 sF<br>*,/
..,.
\99

¶64

THE, CRIMINAI, PETITION IS .\I-LOWED.

¶65

cl_-
. 'I"
gr(

Chandra Shekar Erra , Shekar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Shekar Erra , Shekar 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

Vinod Kumar Viswanath Vs The State of Telangana and another

M/s Medipro Edumangement Private Ltd. and Another Vs State of Telangana and Another

M/s Viswaroopi Energy Private Limited and another Vs State of Telangana and another

Meda Babu Rao Vs The State of Telanagana

Mr.Parlagolla Yadaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.Manjula Vs The State of Telangana and another