Allowed

Shaik Ayyub v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Jul 2022CRLP/380/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Batch of petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings against traders and transporters of tobacco products booked under the IPC, the COTP Act, 2003 and the FSS Act, 2006. Following its earlier common orders, the court quashed the proceedings and directed return of the seized property.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in the respective crimes/calendar cases/sessions cases quashed; Station House Officers/Investigating Officers directed to return the seized property/vehicles on proper identification and v

Shaik Ayyub Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2022)

I I

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶6

MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶9

CRIMINAL P TITION Nos: 370.372. 378. 380. 775. 3451.9517. 9557, 9597, AND I 598of 2021 AND 109. 1290. 1985.3922 AND 5214 of 2022

¶10

CRIMINAL PETITIO N NO.370 0F 2022

¶11

Between:

¶12

! Saifullah Kha4 @ Samiulla Khan, S/o. Ajamathulla Khan, Aged about 39 years, Occ. Owner of Aslam General Store, Rl/o. H.No. 3-3-i98, Adilabad Town, Adilabad District.

¶13

...Petitioner/Accused No.7

¶14

AND

¶15

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

¶16

. Respo nde nts/Com^p la in a nt

¶17

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P .C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petttion, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to case in C.C.No. 161 of 2020 on the file of Junior Civil Judge - Cum - Judicial First Class I,4agistrate, at Adilabad, and quash the proceedings in the above C.C.No.161 of 2020.

¶18

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶19

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.No.161 of 2020 on the file of Junior Civil Judge-Cum- Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Adilabad, pending disposal of the Criminal Petltion.

¶20

¶21

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 Respondertt.

i I

CRIMINAL PETITIoN NOil72 !E2021

I il i

lli it il i a I

ri il rl fI il

Between:

Ayush Agarwal, S/o. Girija Shanker Agaruval, Aged 33^years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No. 4-4-511214111 , Filterbed, Adilabad, Adilabad.

¶32

... PetitioneriAccused

¶33

AND

¶34

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

¶35

... Responde nts/Compla ina nt

¶36

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 casein C.C.No. 141 of 2019 on the} file of Junior Civil Judge - Cum^- Judicial^{First Class Magistrate, at Adilabad, and} quash the proceedings ln the above C.C,No.141 of 2019.

¶37

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶38

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 all further^{proceedings including appearanceof the petitioner} in C.C.No.141 of 2019 on the file of^{Junior Civil Judge - Cum-Judicial First Class} Magistrate, at Adilabad,^pending disposal^{of the above Criminal Petition.}

¶39

This Petition coming on for hearing,^{upon perusing the fvlemorandumof} Grounds of Criminal Petition and^{upon hearing the arguments of Sri GAJANAND} CHAKRAVARTHI, Advocate for the^{Petitioner and the Public Prosecutoron behalf} of the Respondent.

¶40

ri *i ii I'1. It 8r I

¶41

I i I li,l ri

¶42

,'{! t' i rgi^,t

¶43

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 378 OF 2021

¶44

Between:

¶45

f^, Saifullah Khan @ Samiulta Khan, S/o. Ajamathutla Khan, Aged about 39 years, Occ. Owner of Aslam General Store,. Rl/o. H No. 3-3-198, Adilabad Town, Adilabad District.

¶46

... Petitione r/Acc used No.7

¶47

AND

¶48

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

¶49

... Res ponde nts/Com plain a nt

¶50

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- 161 of 2020 on the file of Uunior Civil Judge - Cum - Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Adilabad, and quash the proceedings in the above C.C.No. 161 ol 2O2O.

¶51

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶52

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 grant stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioner in C.C.N0.161 of 2020 on the file of Junior Civil Judge - Cum - Judicial First Class lvlagistrate, at Adilabad, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶53

¶54

CRIMINAL PETITION^{NO:380 OF2021}

rl ri rl fh IJ I

riii I i

Between:

Shaik Ayyub, S/o.^{ShaikKaseem,Aged-about 35 Years' Occ Business'} nylChir'fiJriraxminagar,^{Adilabad Locality, AdilabadDistrict'}

¶60

... Petitioner/Accused

¶61

AND

¶62

li. The State of Telangana, through S'H o'Adilabad-l^{Town Police Station'} ., Adilabad District,^{repi#entJJ6v Fiiutic Prosecutor'HighCourt'Hyderabad} :i ..

¶63

.Respondents/ComPlainant

¶64

¶65

Petition under Section^{482 of Cr'P'C praying that in the circumstances} statedinthetvlemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition'theHighCourtmay be^pleased to^{call for the records relating to casein C'C'No'171 of 2019 on the} fileofJuniorCivilJudge.Cum-JudicialFirstClassMagistrate,atAdilabad,and quash the proceedings^{in the aboveC'C'No' 171' of 2019'}

¶66

r.A. NO^{:, 1} OF²⁰²¹

¶67

Petition under^{Section482 of cr.P.Cpraying that in the circumstances} StatedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighcourtmay be^{pleased to grant} stay all further^{proceedings including appearance of the} 171 ot 2019^{on the file of Junior Civil Judge - Cum - Judicial} petiiioner in C.C.No. First Class^{[r/agistrate, at} Adilabad,^{pendingdisposal of the aboveCriminal} Petition.

¶68

This Petition coming^{on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of} GroundsofCriminalPetitionanduponhearingtheargumentsofSriGAJANAND CHAKRAVARTHI,^{Advocatefor the Petitionerand the Public Prosecutoron} behalf of the^ResPondent.

¶69

..1 :. itn

¶70

¶71

CRIMINAL PETITION^{NO: 775oF 2021}

¶72

Between:

¶73

1-Svedlmran.S/o'SvedAhmed,Agedabout3lyears'occ.Business' RioSrranonagar, Adilabad^{Locality, Adilabad District'}

¶74

2.SvedArbaz.S/o.shaikAkbar,Agedabout2lyears,Occ'Business' - RTo.Shadnadar, Adilabad Locality, Adilabad District'

¶75

e.SfraifMasood,S/o.shaikBaban,Agedgppy!gAyears,Occ'Business' - Rfo.eotmtguda, Adilabad Locality, Adilabad District.

¶76

Abdul Rasheed @^{Shaik Ralheed,} 9{q^{gnqif Chand,.Aged about 49 vears'} -^'Oic. Ariiness,^{Ry-o. Gandhi Chowk, ROitaOaOLocality,Adilabad District'} about 36^years,

¶77

Shamiullah Khan, S/o.^{AzmathUllah Khan, Aged} Oi..erJiness,^Rl/o. Paniesha^{Mohella, AdilabadLocality, A} dilabad District.

¶78

...Petitioners/Accused^{Nos.1to 5}

¶79

AND

¶80

The State of Telangana,^{throughS.HO Adilabad-l -l.gyvn Police Station'} nalaoia-Oistrict, rSpresented^{"by Public Prosecutor,HighCourt' Hyderabad'}

¶81

...ResPondents/ComPlainant

¶82

Petition under section⁴⁸² of^{Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminalPetition,the Highcourt may} be^pleased to call^{for the records relating to casein c.c.No. 179 of 2020 on the} file of Junior civil Judge^{- cum- Judicial First classMagistrate, at Adilabad,and} quash the proceedings in the above^{C.C.No.179ol 2020} '

¶83

l.A NO:1 OF 1

¶84

.; Petition under Section 482 of cr.P.c^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminalPetition,the Highcourt may} be illeased to^grant stay^{of all furtherproceedings including appearanceof the} petitioner in c.c.No.179 ol 2O2O on the^{file of Junior civil Judge} -^{cum - Judicial} First Class Magistrate,^{at Adilabad, pending disposal of the criminalPetition.}

¶85

This Petition coming^{on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of} Grounds of criminal^{Petition and upon hearing the argumentsof Sri GAJANAND} OHAKRAVARTHI, Advocate for the^{Petitionersand the PublicProsecutor on} behalf of the Respondent,

I I I I I I

ilt 'tl *+,

rr tili li II

hl!i :*1 ,i

CRIMINAL PETITION^{NO: 3451 OF 2021}

¶92

Between:

¶93

1:,: Takur Ashok^{Singh, S/o. Prathap Singh, Aged about 36 years' Occ Business'} L.^{FUo. Reddy Colony, Echoda,Adilabad'} ' ilt l'ihrlr Khan, S/o. lbraheem Khan, Aged about 23 years' Occ Driver'

¶94

,, :i*ti :R/o.Subashnagar, Echoda,^Adilabad'

¶95

Saifullah Khan,^{s/o. Azamutallah Khan, Aged about 47 years' occBusiness,} I nyo-. HlNo. S-8-297l1,^{Panjesha Mohalla,Adilabad'}

¶96

lbrahim Abdul,^{S/o. Khaleel, Aged about 4'l years' Occ' Business' R/o'H No'} " i-sZ-zzstz. Bedkamahila, Adilabad District'

¶97

...Petitioners/Accused^{No'1 to 4}

¶98

AND

¶99

The State of Telangana,^{throughS H O Adilabad-ll Town Police Station'} ndia-oii oistiici,^{,6pr"rentJo "ov Frorlcprosecutor,Highcourt, Hyderabad.}

¶100

.. 'ResPonde^nUCom Plain^ant

¶101

Petition under^{Section482 of Cr'P C praying that in the circumstances} statedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminaIPetitlon,theHighCourtmay be^{pleased to call for the recordsrelatrngto case 'in C C No' 357 of 2019 on the} fileofJuniorCivilJudge.Cum.JudicialFirstClassMagistrate,atAdilabad,and quash the proceedings^{in the above C C No 357 ol 2019'}

¶102

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶103

Petition under Section^{482 of Cr'P} 'C^{praying that in the circumstances} StatedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighCourtmay be pleased to^{grant stay of all furtherproceedings including appearanceof the} petitioner in C.C'No.^{357 of 2019 on the file of Junior Civil Judge - Cum - Judiciat} First Class Magistrate,^{at Adilabad,pendingdisposal of the Criminal Petition'}

¶104

This Petition^{coming on for hearing' uponperusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of Criminal^{Petitionand upon hearingthe arguments of Sri GAJANAND} CHAKRAVARTH|,AdvocateforthePetitionersandthePublicProsecutoron behalf of the^ResPondent

¶105

CRIMINAL^{PETITION NO: 9517 OF 2021}

i I

I I i I

i I I

t I

d ll a

Between:

Ooou Anil Kumar,^{S/o. Oggu VenkatshwarRao' Ag-ed about 34. Years'} ' 5;;. 'Ki;u;; b;.tess, ""Rvo H ry) 1s'2-82' Dharms-alapuram dJ"ir.',ro.jprram^{shadribri_l(oirragudem,Bhadradri-KothagudemDistrict.}

¶119

Dara tr,4allikarjuna^{Rao,Sio. Suraiah (Late),aoe 53 vears' Caste Vysya'} occ.Kirana eusinessl"hlJ.-carr.iuiram^{Vittagel wyra- Mandal,Khammam} District.

¶120

Dannarapu^{Vasudeva Rao, S/o} -Haranadha^{Babu' ege- 53- years'} " Culi".vltva, occ.'iiirana--br,op, R/o H No, 8-1-85/1/3' B K Bazar' Khammini, Khammam^District.

¶121

Dannarapu^{Madhava Rao, S/o Haranadha Babu'} -age' .47^years' ; 6;!i;.V;.;r,^{ijii. xilnu irrirp, ruo H No 8-1-851/3' B K Bazar' Khammam'} ' Khammam District.

¶122

lmmidisetty^{Ayyappa, S/o.Venkateswarlu,Age' 41 yearc' Caste Vysya'} - 6;;.Ki*;; sh'tb,'R61 c-"-nohi ct i*ri' wvri, r-nammarfi ' Khammam District' 6. Nakirikanti^{Pradeep Kumar, Sio.} -^{Adinarayana,qSe-' 38 years' Caste.} "' VGJ;Di;. riEni Snop, Fvo. H No.8-+-315, Nijampet, Khammam'

¶123

' Thummalapudi o;;. iiia;;-Sn6p,^{Srinivasa Rao, S/9.} nt".-ri'Nol ii-to-oi+/A,^Ramaiah, NsT^Age' Road',^{45 years' Caste'} Khammam'^Vysya' District Khammam.

¶124

Ooou Annapurna,^{W/o. VenkateswaraRao, Age 49 years' Cast' Vysya'} " 6E3.EGiHt,"'ilo.''-i.' rtro.'-ts-i-Bz, Bhad-rariKoth-agudem' BhadrariKothagudem District.

¶125

Vooou Venkateswara^{Rao' S/o.Seshagiri,Age'55 years'Occ' AutoDriver'} Calie. vysya. Fl/o.^{Kothagudem, Khamrnam'}

¶126

lO.DudekulaJohnBabu,S/o.Saidulu,R/oH'No'5-19-1'AthukuruVillage' lr,4adhira Mandai, Khamamm^District.

¶127

'..Petitioners/Accused^{No'1 to 10}

¶128

AND

¶129

1 AssistantSub-lnspectorofPolice,KhanapuramHaveliPoliceStation' Khammam District.

¶130

...ResPondenUComPlainant

¶131

2,ThestateofTelangana,representedbyitsPublicProsecutor,HighCourt,at Hyderabad.

¶132

,..RespondenUComPlainant

¶133

PetitionunderSection4S2Readwith45lofCr.P.Cprayingthatinthe circumstances stated^{in the Memorandumof Grounds of criminalPetition,the} HighCourtmaybepleasedtoquashtheproceedingsagainstthePetitionersin cc No.2528 ol 2021^{on the file of ll Additional Judicial First class Magistrate, at} Kharnmam in these circumstances^{mentioned aboveto meet the endsof justice'}

¶134

I I

¶135

i 1 l

¶136

!i ) : I II I I 1 i { I

¶137

t.A.^'iid :2OF²⁰²¹

¶138

, :!i i5etition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that^{in the circumstances} statiidtin the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminalPetition,the High court may} bepleasedtodireCtthellAdditionalJudicialFirstClaSsMagiStrate.atKhammam seized material^{1) (V-1} )^{Tobacco 46 bags (46x200=9'200 packets)' 2) GOA 1000-} GT and T^{(12) bags (12x60=720 packets),3) RR Tobacco} .1 1 bags (11x42=462 packets) 4) MIRAGE^{Tobacco 14 bags (14x35=490dandalu)'5) SWAGATGold} Tobacco-1 bag^(1x63 =^{63 packets),6) VK Expert quality-1 bag (1x60= 60} packets), 7) Amber^{Tobacco-6 bags (6x600=696 + 40 loose = 640 packets) Total} worth of Rs. 13,50,000/-and^{1) One Santro Car bearingNoAP16AG5567and2)} one Appe diesel^{Auto bearing No-TSO4UA2456 by the 1st Respondentin Crrme} No33Tot2O2lonthefileofllAdditionalJudicialFirstClassMagistrateat Knamriram^{pendingdisposal of the maincase'} , rfⁱ

¶139

:., ,'1fi.;,fhis Petition coming on for hearing' upon perusing the Memorandum^of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition and upon hearingthe arguments of Mis C' SUNITHA} XUMnhf , Advocate^{for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the} Respondents.

t. r 'a

tiI

CRIMINAL PETITION^{NO: 9557 OF2021}

¶147

Between:

¶148

Reoala Madhu, S/o.^{Venkanna, Age 35 years'^OccGumastha'Fl/-oKummari} ' D;5;:dffiy;btt1"*. li'btij vtbir""i God'own' suryapet' Suryapet^District' 2-!' haharaou Naresh,^{S/o. Laxminarayana'Age.35 Yeaars' Occ Business'} - iilo.Futbb"nier, Suryapet Town, Suryapet District' l' r

¶149

"'Petitioners/Accused^{No'1 and 2}

¶150

AND

¶151

¶152

Sub-inspector^{of Police, Police Station Suryapet ll Town' Suryapet District'} ... Res Po nde^{nUC om} Plain^{a nt}

¶153

2 The State of^{Telangana, representedby its Public Prosecutor'HighCourt'at} Hyderabad.

¶154

...ResPondenUComPlainant

¶155

Petitron under^{Section 482 Read with 45'1 of Cr'PC praying that in the} circumstancesstatedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,the High Court may^{be pleasedto quashthe proceedings againstthe petitionersin} Crime No 317 of^{2021on the file of Police. Station Suryapet ll Town' Suryapet} District, in the^{circumstances mentioned aboveto meet the ends of justice'}

¶156

I.A. NO:2 OF²⁰²¹

¶157

rr petition under section 482 Read with 451 of cr.P.c^{praying that in the} circumstances^{statedin the Memorandumof Grounds of crirninalPetition'the} High Court may^{be pleasedto direct the1 st Respondentto return18 bags of} Khaini Amber^{Gutka packets. Each bag contains "l00 packets'each packet} containing25pouches.seizedbythe,lstRespondentinCrimeNo3lTof2o2lon the file of Police Station^{Suryapetll Town, Suryapet District, pending disposal of} the main case

¶158

ThisPetitioncomingonforhearing'uponperusingtheMemorandumof Grounds of criminal^{Petition and upon hearingthe arguments of M/s c. suN|THA} KUMARI, Advocate^{for the Petitioners and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the} Respondents.

,l rt +1, *+' il

I I I

I 1 i jl I I

I .- t ., l ,.,1

CRIMINAL PETITION^{NO: 9s97OF2021}

¶164

Between:

¶165

Uooala Bala Raiu, S/o.^Krishnaiah, Aged about 32^{Years, Occ. Business,} Ri'ci.Mothibagh^{Cblony,Vikarabad.}

¶166

...Petitioner/Accused

¶167

AND

¶168

ThestateofTelanqana,throughS.H.o.VikarabadPoliceStation,Vikarabad oⁱ !i ri.,il ii i*l-a-niei^{uv p u uii c"p ro secuto r, Hi g h cou rt,H vd e ra bad'}

¶169

..'ResPondents/ComPlainant

¶170

Petition under^{Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances} stated in the^{Memorandum of Groundsof Criminal Petition,the HighCourt may} be pleSsed to call^{for the records relating to casein S C No''1 57 of 2021 on the} file of Senior^{Civil Judge - Cum - AssistantSessionJudge' at Vikarabad'and} quash the proceedings^{in the above S,C No 157 ol 2O21'}

¶171

t.A. NO 20F 2021

¶172

PetitionunderSection482ofCr.P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstances statedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighCoUrtmay bepleasedtostayallfurtherproceedingincludingappearanceofthepetitioners in s.c.No.^{157 of 2021 on the file of senior civil Judge - cum - Assistant session} Judge, at Vikarabad,^{pendingdisposalof the above Criminal Petition}

¶173

t.A. NO :3 OF²⁰²¹

¶174

.^{I'l-"PetitionunderSection482 of Cr'P'C praying that in the circumstances} Statdd:in the^{Memorandum of Groundsof Criminal Petition,the High Court may} u" pr"i."o^{to direct the courtbelow to return the seized material in S.C.No.157} ot iOZ.l on^{the file oi Senior Civil3udge - Cum - Assistant Session Judge'at} Vikarabad,^{pendingdisposal of the Criminal Petition'}

¶175

This Petition coming^{on for hearing, uponperusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of^{Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri GAJANAND} CHAKRAVARTHl,AdvocateforthePetitionerandthePublicProsecutoronbehalf of the Respondent.

i il

ir :

I ,,!i il ,1 ',It lriI !fi+. :ji t lil,iil li j

¶180

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:^{9598 OF2021}

¶181

Between:

¶182

Bed Fl/o^oi -H.No.Zt^Ravi -901t,^Kumar, Kosgi^S/o. Village^Ramulu, and^Aged Mandal, Mahaboobnagar^{about44 Years,Occ.} District.^Business I 2. 'Gubba Manikanta, Sio. Late Sathyanarayana, Aged about 25 years, Occ.Business, Fl/o. H.No.4-2-573, Shavaram^{Nagar Colony, Vikarabad}

¶183

...Petitioner/Accused No.'l and²

¶184

AND

¶185

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O.^{Vikarabad Police Station,Vikarabad} District, representei by Pubtic-Prosecutor,^{High Court, Hyderabad.}

¶186

...RespondenUComplainant

¶187

,. Petition^{underSection482 ol Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of^{Criminal Petition,the HighCourt may} be pleAsed to call for the records relating to^{casein S.C.No. 153 of 2021 on the} file of Senior Civil Judge - Cum - Assistant Session^{Judge, at Vikarabad, and} quash the proceedings in the above S.C.No. 153 of 2021.

¶188

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶189

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the tvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition,the High Court may} be pleased to stay all further^proceeding including^{appearanceof the petitioners} in S.C.No. 153 of 2021 on the file of Senior Civil^{Judge - Cum - AssistantSession} Judge, at Vikarabad,^pending disposal of the^{Criminal Petition.}

¶190

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶191

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying thatⁱⁿ the^{circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition,the HighCourt may} be pleased to direct the court below to return the^{seized Material in S.C.No.153} of 2021 on the file of Senior Civil Judge - Cum^{- Assistant Session Judge'at} Vikarabad,^pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶192

l,rli ti ti

¶193

FI rkf ]ill I I I I t

¶194

, fhis Petition^{coming on for hearing, uponperusingthe Memorandumof} Grounds of criminal^{Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri GAJANAND} cHAKRAVARTHI,^{Advocatefor the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutoron behalf} of the ResPondent.

rI,t I I I nl Itrl i

! I ! i 1 I

-,,, l I II f I I

i I I I I

4t "tlo*" Fi.,r': Between:

¶201

CRIMINAL^{PETITION NO: 109 OF 2022}

¶202

Shaik Abdul Razzak,^{S/o. Shaik AbdulRaheem' Agedabout42 yearc'} Oii.ersines=,^{FI/o. NirmalTown' Nirmal District'}

¶203

...Petitioner/Accused

¶204

AND

¶205

The State of^{Telangana. throughS.H O Nirmal(]) Police Station' Nirmal} o i !i rl"il i"u ir"^t n i""Jn v C,^{ni i. "p ro se c u to r' Hi g h c o u rtH vde ra b a d} "

¶206

... Res Pond^e nts/C^om Pla^{in a nt}

¶207

Petition under^{Section482 of Cr P C praying that in the circumstances} StatedlntheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighCourtmay be^pleased to^{call for the records relatingto case in Crime No 403 o'f 2021on} thefileofPolicestationNirmal(T),NirmalDistrict,andquashtheproceedingsin the above Crime.No.^{4O3 of 2021.}

¶208

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2 022

¶209

PetitionunderSection4E2olCr.P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstances stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof Criminal Petition,the HighCourt may} be pleased to stay^{all further proceeding including arrest of the petitioner in Crime} No.403ol2o21ofNirmal(T)PoliceStation,NirmalDistrict,pendingdisposalof the above Criminal^Petition.

¶210

This Petition coming^{on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandumof} Grounds of Criminal^{Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri GAJANAND} CHAKRAVARTHl,AdvocateforthePetitionerandthePublicProsecutoronbehalf of the Respondent.

¶211

CRIMINAL PETIT N NO: 1290 OF 22

¶212

I I i I i I

¶213

hl. ,t ;'.'i.iir t ,lt :tl #t ,l ,] IH i r.s r^!i ;*

¶214

Between:

¶215

Balaram Bhati, S/o.^{Heeralal Bhati, AgedAbout 48 Years'Occ..Business'} I;,i;;; ra-+ki,^{e"sum eaiar,opfiosite Jain School, Nampallv'Begum} .'t' Bazar, Hyderabad. r ... "'Petitioner/Accused^No'2

¶216

:iit,',{:

¶217

i. SuU tnspector^{of Police, Humayunnagar Police Station' Hyderabad District'}

¶218

..'ResPondenUComPlainant

¶219

2' The State of^{Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, at} r Hyderabad.

¶220

...RespondenUComPlainant

¶221

Petition under^{Section482 ol Cr'P} 'C^{praying that in the circumstances} statedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighCourtmay bepleasedtoquashallfurtherproceedingsagainstthePetitionerinCrimeNo'24 ot2022onthefileofHumayunnagarPoliceStationHyderabadDistrict,inthe circumstances^{mentioned aboveto meet the ends of justice'}

¶222

t.A. NO: 20F²⁰²²

¶223

PetitionunderSection4S2ofCr.P.CprayingthatintheCircumstanCeS statedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition'theHighCourtmay bepleasedtostayofallfurtherproceedingsagainstthePetitionerinCrimeNo24 of2022onthefileofHumayunnagarPoliceStationHyderabadDistrict,pending disposal of the^{main case.}

¶224

This Petition^{coming on for hearing, upon perusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of Criminal^{Petition and upon hearing the argumentsof Sri PRASAD} RAVANABo|NA,AdvocateforthePetitionerandthePublicProsecutoronbehalf of the ResPondents.

¶225

¶226

i $t ',''I $1, t+t l,l

t I I t

CRIMINAL^{PETITION NO: 1985 OF 2022}

¶231

Between:

¶232

tr/oHNo30' 3t1il9ff #i,i[B?]i^{j#-'ii3l'fiffi ,'J,#'?:",i.?f 3;3,Y'j,'Ri3ft}

¶233

... Petitioner/Accused

¶234

AND

¶235

The State of^{Telangana, through SHO Police.station Mandamarri'} I ;#,""#;iJ^{dy Fii6ilcp'dJ&%;iiisdd"nioi the state of relansana, at} Hyderabad.

¶236

"'ComPlainanUResPondent

¶237

2r,The Food^{Safety Officer, Mancherial District' Mancherial"}

¶238

...ResPondent

¶239

Petition under^{Section482 of Cr'P C praying thatin} the circumstances stated in^{the Memorandum of Groundsof Criminal Petition' the HighCourt may} be pleased^{to quash the proceedingsin FIR No'39of 2022' daled 26'02 2022 on} thefileofSHoPoliceStationN4andamarriagainstthePetitioner/Accused.

¶240

l.A. NO:^{2oF 2022}

¶241

Petition under^{section482 of cr.P.Cpraying that in the circumstances} StatedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighCourtmay be^{pleasedto grant stay of all furtherproceedingsin FIR No 39 of 2022 ' daled} of SHO^{Police StationMandamarriagainstthe} 261O2t2022 on^{the file} Petitioner/Accused.

¶242

i^I ili This^{Petition coming on for hearing' uponperusingthe Memorandumof} Grounds of criminal^{Petition and upon hearingthe argumentsof sri KoNDADI} AJAYKUMAR,AdvocateforthePetitionerandthePublicProsecutoronbehalfof the Respondent^{No.1 and of the RespondentNo'2 not appearingin person or by} Advocate.

I i

[, F i, I

r H I f; i , I rl

.l ul

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3922 OF 2022

¶248

Between:

¶249

arender Gupta @ Bachu Narender, S/o. Late Bachu Rajaiah,^{Age 58 years,} cc. Business, F/o.H.No.1-'1-261, Vinayakanagar,^Nizamabad.

¶250

,Petitioner/Accused

¶251

AND

¶252

The State of Telangana, through SHO Police^{Station NizamabadRural,} represented by Public Prosecutor, High^{Court of Telangana.}

¶253

G. Ramesh, S.l of Police, Police^Station,r rrrrrr::t;:l::;J:1"'""" District, Nizamabad.

¶254

...RespondenUDefacto Complainant

¶255

Petition under section 482 o'f^{Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances} stated ln the Memorandum of^{Groundsof criminalPetition,the High court may} be^pleased to^quash the^{proceedingsin FIR No. 122 of 2022 on the file of SHO} Police Station Nizamabad^Rural.

¶256

l.A. NO: 1 F 2022

¶257

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of^{Groundsof criminalPetition,the High court may} be^pleased to^grant stay of^{all further proceedingsin FIR No.122 ot 2022, daled} 19.04.2022 on the file of the SHo^{PolicestationNizamabad Rural including} arrest of the^petitioner.

¶258

This Petition coming on^{for hearing, uponperusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of criminal Petition and^{upon hearingthe argumentsof Sri KoNDADI} AJAY KUMAR, Advocate for^{the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutoron behalf of} the Respondents.

¶259

l.-i-

¶260

CRIMINAL PE T TION^N : 5214 OF 202

I I t i I I iI t l

1l pt :l I rf I

I I :l ri :f

Between:

Awadh Bhushan^{Tripathi,S/o. Ramnaray} an Tirupati, Aged^{about 45 Years,} Occ. Business, F/o.^{Bhukthapur, Adilabad} District.

¶266

...PetitioneriAccused

¶267

AND

¶268

'ThestateofTeiangana,throughS.H.OAdilabadlTownPoliceStation' . eatraoio District, r6pielented^{"by pubtic prosecutor, High court, Hyderabad.}

¶269

.Respondents/ComPlainant

¶270

Petition under^{Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminalPetition,the Highcourt may} be^pleased to^{quash the proceeding againstthe petitioners/accusedin crime} No.169 of 2O22 onthe^{file of Police station Adilabad-l(T) Policestation, Adilabad} District, and consequently^{direct the police to returnthe sizedmaterialin} Crime.No. 169 of 2022.

¶271

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2022

¶272

Petition under Section^{482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminalPetition,the Highcourt may} be pleased to direct the^{police to returnthe seized materialin crime.No. 169 of} 2022 on the file of^{Police station Adilabad-l (T) Police station, AdilabadDistrictto} the petitioner,^pending disposal^{of the above CriminalPetition'}

¶273

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 Petitioner and the Public Prosecutoron behalf} of the Respondent.

¶274

The Court made the following:^{COMMON ORDER}

¶275

ItoYIlr.r sttl.tt s't t( t. r(. t. \KSH\t \

¶276

('Iil\tl,\l_ t,t. I t't l O\ \os..170 -172 -trlJ^.r80 775 .1-l5 t 95 r". 9557 9597 & 959ti OF 2r)ll ,\t) l0e t290 le85 .1912 & 52 l{ Ot" 20ll

¶277

C'0}I\IO\ 0RDT,R:

¶278

All thcse^('rinrinal [)ctitions are filcd by the respective pet;tioncrs under Scction 482 ol the Code ol the Criminal Proccdurc. 1973, to qr-rash the proceedings in the respcctive (-rimes/('alcndar CascsiScssions Cases rcgistered lor the otfences undcr Sections - 188. 170.272,)13.420,35i and 328 rcad wirh 5l I ol' IPC; Sections - l0 (2) re.ad r.vith.7 (2) and 24 ( l) ol- rhe ( i.garcttcs and Othe.r ['obaceo I)roducts (Prthibition ol Adr crtiscrne.nt ancl ll,-'eLrlation ol I rade ancl Cotnrncrcc. Plocluction. Supplr and [)istlibLrtion ) ,\c. ()-i ( lirr shorr^'('() I l) r\ct') and Scctions - l. I rrnd -1 o1' thc l'oocl Satctr. ancl Stirndalcls Act, 1006 (lbr short^'l:SS ,\e t.)

¶279

l.^'l he naturc' ol'allcuations in all th.'se ottbnccs reiatc ro transportation, salc. posscssion. rrranulaclure, storage. ctc. ol' tobacco products including khaini, zarda. pan masala and othcr such allcgedly harmful and bannecl products.

Heard leamed counsel for the respective parties and

¶284

learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State, and perused the record.

¶285

Perusal olthe record would reveal that the /us involved in this batch o1' cases had alreadv been dealt u,ith bv this Court crtcnsirelr irr !Iohd. .lanreel ..\hmed r. State of^'felanganar, I his Court in tlre said cases bv rcll inrr on r arious decisions o1- thc Supreme Court cxplaincd ancl interpreted the reler,anI Pr.or isiorrs rrith rihich thc petitiorrcrs hercin r.i cre charged, Iollowing the said ludgnrent. this Court had also disposed ol similar matrel.s vidc Cornmon Order dated 10.06.202: in (lrl.P. No.5619 of 1020 and batch.^'fhLrs, nothing remains lurther to be discussed in this batch of cases. Following the said judgrnents, the proceedings in the subject crimes/C.Cs/S.Cs fbr the ol'fences under Sections - 188, 270,272,273,420 and 328 read with 511 of IPC and Section -20 (2) read with 7 (2) and 24 (l) ol the COTP Act are liable to be qr.rashed.

¶286

1,,:: r^, .'^, rl

¶287

( ri /) ,, J^{-/r ,r1} ,'ll-l^I d^|'rr.;

¶288

-t

¶289

As far^{as Sections - 2, 3 and 4 of the FSS Act are} concerned,^{perusal of the complaints/chargesheetsdo not disclose} the ingredients^{ofthe said offences and'therefore' the proceedings} for the said offences^{are liable to be quashed'}

¶290

As lar as^{thc otTcncc undcr Section -153 of IPC is} concerncd.^{lcarned Assisrarrt Ptrblic ['rose'cutor rvor'tld contcnd that} there is specific^{allegatiorragainsrthc pctilionersuith rcgard to thc} olltncc rtncler^{Section - l5io1' IPCPerusal of the charge} sheersi conl^{p laints in sonre of the cascs would reveal thatthc} accused^{persons used crir-ninal lbrce and obstructcdthc policein} chccking^{vehicles and detcrrcdthcm fl'orn dischargingthcir} legitimate duties'^{ln some ol' thc cases'it is mentionedthat on} seeing the^{police,accused person(s) pushed themto escape and} obstructed^{their lawful duties''thus'the policehave registeredthe} subject^{crimesfor the said offence'}

¶291

Section^{- 353 of tPC dealswith 'assaultor criminallorce} to dcrer^{public scrvant tiorn dischargcof his duty' ln view of the} sarnc. it^{is ap1-lositcto cxtract thc saiclpror' isiorlra hich is as utlclcr:}

¶292

)

¶293

Ctl.P. No.370 o/ )E l & buLc .l

¶294

"-1-i.1. 455nn;1 or crirninal force to deter public serrant fronr tlischarge of his dutr'. Whocr cr assirults^()r use\ crintinirl li,rcc l(r il,r\ pcrs()n heirrg a puhlic scrrrint in thc crceuliLrrt ol his dutl as such pu[.rlic scrvant. or sith intcnt to pre\cn1 or dcter that person lionr discharging hrs dutl as such public ser\ant. or in consequence ol anything done or attempted to be done by such person in the lawful discharge of his duty as such public servant, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years. or with llne. or with both.

¶295

In this regard. relying on the decision rendered by the lJigh Court ol Andhra Pradcsh at Amaravati in Jaganath

¶296

linterprises. Eluru r. Statc of ,..1'., through SHO, I'amur P.S., Prakasanr l)istrict2. lcarned counscl fbr the petitioner herein \ould subnrit that the complaintsicharge sheets laclis the ingredients ol ofl'encc urldcr Sectior'r -i53 o1'll'C and. the rcfirrc-. thc lrrocccdings^{lirr thc siridol'l'encu'arc lilso liahle to he quashed}

¶297

lLrrther'. ln l)urgacharan r'. State ol'Orissa-. the llon'blc Apex Court held that under Section - 351 ol IPC. the ingreclients ol assault or use of'criminal lbrce rvhile the public servant is doing his

¶298

2020 (l) At.T (Crl) 215 AIR I966 SC ]775

¶299

Kt,../ Crl.P. No.370 o/ 2021 & batch

¶300

duty as such is necessar,. II rr as also held that mere Llse 01' lbrcc. hou'cver. is not enough to bring an Act \,ithin tlre terrns o1'Se.ction 5i of ll)(1. It has lirrtlrc-r' to hr- sho\lt that lorcc *as usccl int"'ntionallt' lo alt\ porson * ithoLrt tlrat pcrson's conscnt in ordcr to cornnrit an olJencc ol r.i,ith thc intention or u itir the l<norvledgc. rhat thc use of l'orce \'ill cause injury, f'ear or annol-ance to the person against whom the lorce is used. In the case on hand, perusal of the rccord would reveal that there u,ere no injuries caused out of the lbrce alleged to have used by the petitioner injuries were caused.

¶301

In Jaganath Enterprises:. the lcarned Singlc Judgc of' the High Court of Andhra I'radesh at Amarar"ati observed as under

¶302

''Se.lion i5-\ lP( i. rlsrr ptcssccl into :err icc bv thc poliec in thc:c eir:e: In tlte elrse on hlrrtd. lhe Lrrtlr i:suc that is ruisctl i: thlrt the tcrusc'd pLrshed' lirrlir lhr: pirliec ollicer rihile trr inu lo c.eagrc. Ilri. br it.ell. in tlrc ol,inion ol lhii⁽ aLlrt. \')ul(l ,r(Jl irr()Lrtl t(r use^(rl ;r:5irult^()r erinrinlrl lirrt. .rrlrilr:l lr PLrhlie :ei\lull Ilirln tlisehrtrgins t,f' hi: tlLrtie:.'

¶303

I l.^'l hus, pt'imu.luc'ie. thc cornplaintsi chargc' sheets lack thc ingredients o1' the oft-ence undcr Section 353 o1'IPC and, \

¶304

( rl.l''. \t).3:() tl 30)

¶305

¶306

therefore, the proceedings for the said offence are also liable to be quashed.

¶307

Following the Common Order in Mohd. Jameel Ahmed (Supra) and the Common Order dated 10.06.2022 in Crl.P. No.5619 o1 2020 and batch. all thesc Criminal pc.ritions are allor',ed clLrashirrg thc procccclinss in the rcspccri\c ( rirnesiCalcndar Casesi Se'ssions ('ascs against the respccti\ e pr'tit ioner (s)- accuscd.

¶308

As the proceedings in the aloresaid Criminal petitions are quashed against the respective petitioners, the respective Station House Officers/lnvestigating Officers are hereby directed to return the seized propefty/vehicles on proper identification and verification ol ownership under due acknowledgment. In cases where charge sheets are already filed the respective petitioners are at liberty to file appropriate applications before the concerned Magistrate fbr retum ol the seized property/vehic le and the Nlagistrate shall consider the sar.ne in accorclance ivith law.

¶309

¶310

t,l/ t ti [) ,).;'t/ t)t:t)-r/ (\ ,fil/./r

¶311

¶312

However, it is made clear that il- the seized stock of

¶313

tobacco products or other products are expired, the same shall be

¶314

destroyed by taking permission from the concemed Magistrate.

¶315

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

¶316

¶317

al petl tions shall stand closed

¶318

,TRUE COPY//

¶319

SD/-K.SAILESHI DEPUTY REGT9TRAR r/ U

SECTION OFFICER

I I 1 I I

i I I

To,

The Judicial First Class l\ilagistrate, at Adilabad.

¶325

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

¶326

The Station House Officer, Adilabad-l Town Police Station, Adilabad^District

¶327

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of^{Tetangana, at} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶328

The ll Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Khammam.

¶329

The Station House Officer, Khanapuram Haveli Police Station,^Khammam District.

¶330

The Principal Judicial First Class lVlagistrate Court, at Suryapet.

¶331

B. The Station House Officer, Suryapet ll Town Police Station,^Suryapet District.

¶332

The Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, at Vikarabad^District.

¶333

'10.The Station House Officer, Vikarabad Police Station, Vikarabad District. 11.The Station House Officer, Nirmal^(Town) Police Station,^{Nirmal District.}

¶334

12.The lV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Hyderabad.

¶335

13.The Station House Officer, Humayunnagar^Police Station^Hyderabad District.

¶336

14.The I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Mancherial.

¶337

15.The Station House Officer, Mandamarri Police Station,^Ramagundam.

¶338

16.The ll Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at^Nizamabad.

¶339

17.The Station House Officer, Nizamabad Rural Police Station,^Nizamabad District.

¶340

'18.The Senior Civil Judge -cum- Assistant Sessions Judge at Vikarabad.

¶341

19.One CC to Sri Gajanand Chakravarthi, Advocate [OPUC]

¶342

20.One CC to M/s C. Sunitha Kumari, Advocate IOPUC]

¶343

21 .One CC to Sri Prasad Ravanaboina, Advocate [OPUC]

¶344

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

¶345

23.Two CD Copies

¶346

24.One Spare Copy

¶347

(Along with a Copy of the order dated 05.07.2021 in Crl P No.152 ot 2a2O aod batch and common order dated 10.06.2022ⁱⁿ Crl.P.No.5619^{of 2020 and} batch) MN/K gbr

¶348

¶349

¶350

I ,.iiri ,l I t i .1.i ,lt I i

I ,rl '.1 ,:i , i

HIGH COURT

DATED:^0410712022

COMMON^ORDER

CR INA, PE lo Nos: 37⁰ 72 78 5 1 5',17 5 I D 9 98 20 21 ANO I 1 0 1 85 22 AND 214 20 I oo 2E luL ?07:t \ -i_

¶356

ALLOWING^{THE ALL THESE GRIMINALPETITIONS}

¶357

HON'BLE^{SRT JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN}

¶358

642L OF 2020; CRIMINAL PETITION Nos .5619,^s638. 3314 6926 7361 739L 7455 7543 7873 7885 8116 20. 9044,9^{o53, 9065,9068} 907L, 8461, 87L6.^A99a ,90 9072 9073⁹⁰⁷⁷ 9079 9095 9098 9099 9101 9l 05 9lo7 9LL2 9116 9L2L 9L24 9L43 9153 9168 9205 9266 9294⁹²⁹⁴ 9339 9341 9226 9252^92569264 89. 951 8.^{9534. 9569.9583.} 9343 . 936^{a.946L.9469,94} 9587 9599 9629 9651 9655 9753 9759 9764 97aA 1&10 314^{0F2O2LAND 308.} 9793. 9a64.^10195.1031 469 47L 537 559 574 98 606 615 627 759 776 . 1192.^{t205. L2o6.1369,} 777 . 783.78^{a.947. 1131.1141} L472 1606 L751L756 t772 1853 1854 1863 L934 o50. 21 54.237^{6.2432,2 433,} L944, 20o+.2o4^2.2047,2 2459.26 35.26^{4o^. 2733} 2 768,2a22.^{2a23.29a1, 3o40,} 3233 3290³²⁹⁷ 3362 3373 3374 3093 3094³¹¹⁰ . 3a24^{4055. 4087. 4LO3} 3386. 35^{43. 3673. 3758. 3769} 4LO4 4L54 4159 4209 4307 4322 4323 &,^{4586 0F} 2022.

¶359

COMMo^{N ORDER:}

¶360

All these^{CriminalPetitions are t'iled by the respectrvt:} petitioners under^{Section- 482 of the Code of the Criminal} Procedure,^{1973, to quash the proceedings in the respective}

¶361

i I t

¶362

Crl.P. No.5619 of 2020 & 2

¶363

Crimes/Calendar Cases/Sessions Cases registered for the offences under Sections - 188, 269, 270,272,273,328,336 & 420 read with 34,149,51I of IPC; Sections - 3 (m), 20 (2),21 (t),21 (2), 22,7 (3) and 7 (5) ol' the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco products (Prohibition of Advertisernent and Regulation of Trade and ('ornmerce. I)roduction, Suppll, and Distribution) Act, 2003 (for short'CO'fP Act')and Secrions - 58 and 59 (i) of the Food Salety and Standards Act, 2006 (fbr short 'FSS Act').

¶364

The nature of allegations in all these offences relate to transportation, sale, possession, manufacfure, storage, etc. of tobacco products including khaini, zarda, pan masala and other such allegedly harmful and banned products.

¶365

Heard leamed counsel for the respective parties and learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents - ' State, and perused the record.

¶366

Perusal ofthe record would reveal that the /is involved in this batch ofcases had already dealt wirh by this Court extensively vidc comnron order dated 05.07.2021 in Crl.P. No.l52 of 2020 and batch which rvas reported as Mohd. Jameel Ahmed v. State of

¶367

t't t Crl.P. .Yo.5619 ol !020 & hatth

¶368

-l

¶369

Telanganal. This Court in the said case by relying on various decisions of the Supreme Court explained and interpreted the relevant provisions with which the petitioners herein are charged.

¶370

With regard to offences under Sections _ 5g and 59 (i) of the FSS Act, 2006 it was held by this Court that police cannot initiate prosecution and investigate the offences under the FSS Act, 2006. The power to initiate prosecution is conferred only on the Food Safety Officers appointed under the FSS Act, 2006. Further, this court held that 'tobacco' does not falr within the definition of 'food' under the FSS Act, 2006. Therefore, the petitioners hercin cannot be charged for of'tences under Sections _ 5g and 59 (i) ol the FSS Act, 2006.

¶371

Further, in relation to the offences under Sections _ lgg, 269,270,272,273,328,336 &42Oread with 34, l49,5lt of the IPC, this Court gave detailed findings as to how the said provisions do not attract merely because tobacco products were being sold, transported, possessed, etc. This Court relying on the decisions of the Apex Court held that only the COTP Act, 2003 will apply in relation to offences relating to sale, manufacture and distribution of '^{2022 criLt6q2}

¶372

At.

¶373

Ctl.P.^{lto.56l9 oJ 2020&batch}

¶374

-l

¶375

tobacco^{products.Therelbre,in light of this Court'sdecision in} Mohd. Jameel^{Ahmed(Supra), the offences alleged under the IPC} are not made^{out againstthe Petitioners herein'}

¶376

In relation^{to offences under Sections - 20 (2)' 7 (3) and7} (5) this court^{in Mohd'JameelAhmed (Supra)had heldas}

¶377

follows:

¶378

With^{regardto the offences under COTPAcq it is} relevant^{to mentionthe objects and the reasonsof the} said Act^{itself clearly state that the act is meant to} prohibit the^{advertisement of, and to provide for the} r"grlation^{of trade and commerce in' and production'} sr,lply and^{distribution of, cigarettes and other tobacco} proar.,, and^{lbr matters connectedtherewithor} incidental^{thereto. A reading of the saidobjects of the} said Act^{rvould reveal that a total ban ol tobacco} products^{was llot envisaged by the said Act. The} l'arliarnent^{mercly' ltlt itcxpedient to controlthe} advetliseuent^{and sale of tobacco products'As noted} earlier^{tn the order, Section-3 (p) of the COTP Act and} the schedule^{therein define tobacco products'Pan} masala,^{gutkhaand chewing tobaccoare included in the} definition^{of tobaccoproducts' Section-5 of the COTP} Act deals^{with prohibitionof advertisementof cigarette} and other^{tobaccoproducts only' No person' who is} engaged^{in the production,supply or distribution of} .if*"tt.t or^{other products shall advertise the same'} Siimitarly,^{no person having the control over a medium} can advertise^{cigarettesor tobaccoproducts'and no} person shall^{be a part of any advertisement'}

¶379

\L.

¶380

KL,J Crl.P. No.5619 of 2020 &batch

¶381

¶382

Section-7 of the COTP Act deals with the imposition of restriction on the sale, trade, commerce of tobacco products unless 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 adclition, Section-6 of the COTP Act, prohibits the sale o1' ciearettes or other tobacco products to a person rvho is under the age of l8 years are in an area rvithin 100 vards of any cducational institution.

¶383

31, A reading of this Act. particularlv Sections-4" 5. 6 and 7 clearlv shows that there is no^general ban or general prohibition on the manufacture/sale of tobacco^products. 22 What is barred is mereh' the sale of these rrroducts to a^person" who is below the age of 18 vears and in an area within 100 vards ofan educational institution. The other aspccts covered bv Sections-5 and 7 of the COTP Act. deal with the advertisement and the warning" which is to be contained on a^packase. in which the tobacco product is packed. This is a regulatory mechanism onlv. Therefore. according to this Court. the above said allegations of transportation.^possession. storage. sale and purchase of banned tobacco products rvill not attract the offence under Section-7 of the COTP Act.

¶384

As far as Section-20 of the COTP Act is concemed, as stated above, the allegations against the petitioner in respective complaints/charge sheets are that they were transporting, possessing, storing. selling and purchasing the banned tobacco products to the customers illegally in order to gain rvrongful profits. In vierv of the said allegation, it is apt to rel-er to Section-20 (2) ol the

¶385

¶386

Crl.P. No.56l9 of2020^{& batch}

¶387

¶388

¶389

COTP Act for better^{appreciationof the case and to} decide the issue in^{question,andthe sameis as under:} "20. Punishr-rrent^{fbr t-ailure to give specified warning} and nicotine and^{tar contents.-}

¶390

(l)

¶391

(2) Any person rvho sells or^{distributes cigarettes or} tobacco products which^{do not contain eitheron the} package or on their label,^{the specified warningand the} nicotine and tar^{contents shall in the case of first} conviction be^{punishablewith imprisonmentfor a tem,} which may extend^{to one year,or with fine whichmay} extend to one^{thousandmpees, or with both,and, for} the second or^{subsequent conviction,with} imprisonment for^{a term whichmayextendto twoyears} and with fine^{which may extend to three thousand} rupees."

¶392

Thus. Section-2O^{of COTP Act deals rvith} ounishment^fo r^{failure toglve snecifiedrvarning and} nicotinc and tar contents. But in the com lain ts/charge^{sheets.therets no} allegation tradc or contnterce in^{contrabandor anv other} -tobacco products u ithout label and specil'ied l arning orr the said^{products.ln vierv of thesanle.} the con tcnts ol th e^{complaints/ch arg e shects lack thc} insretlients of Sec^{tion-20(2) ol'the COI'P Act. Even.} there is no allegation^{that the seized productsdo not} contain labels with statutory^{warning. Thus.} registerin s the crimes^{for the said offence aainst} the^petitioners is not onlv^{contrarv to Section-20(2)}

¶393

[::

¶394

:--.^- .^--=::=-t

¶395

=-------.-_ --:i---:=.=1=:=--

¶396

K1...1 Crl.P. Nt 5619 ol )t)lt) & huk h

H t'I

I I rll I il i I

I 1 i I I i I

Of COTP Act. b ut also contrar, to the principle laid doun in Chid ura la Shv amsubderl. In vierv of the same. th e offence under Section-20 (2) of COTP Act is also liable to be quas hcd agains t the petitioners. I once agatn reiterate that I agree rvith the orinciple laid down bv the learned SinsIe Judses of the Hieh Cou rt of Andhra Pradesh tn Chidurala Shvamsu bderl. Sri Jasanath Enter rtses 2020 0) ALT rl. 2ts APH and V. N a eslYa ra Rao 2020 Supreme (AP) 348.

¶401

Therefore, in the present batch of the petitions, there are no allegations which support the ingredients of Section 7 and 20 of the COTP Act, 2003.

¶402

It is relevant to note that in some of the cases, the Petitioners were charged under Sections 2l and 22 of the COTp Act,2003, and the said provisions are extracted belorv.

¶403

"21. Punishment for srnoking in certain places. (l) Whoever contravenes the provisions of section 4 shall be punishable with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees. (2) An offence under this section shall be compoundable and shall be tried summarily in accordance with the procedure provided for summary trials in the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)."

¶404

¶405

Crt.P No.56l9^{ol 20)0 & bLttc}

¶406

¶407

"22.^{Punishmentfor advertisementof cigarettes andtobacco} products.-Whoever^{contravenes the provisionof section5} shall, on conviction,^{be punishable-(a) in the case of first} conviction,^{with imprisonmentfor a termwhich mayextendto} two years or^{with fine which may extend to onethousand} rupees or with^{both,and (b) in thecaseofsecond or subsequent} conviction^{with rmprisonmentfor a term whichmay extend to} live ycars and^{with{ine whichmayextendto fivethousand} rupees

¶408

According^{to this Court, the ingredients of Section2l of} CoTPAct,2003arenotsatistied.Thereisnoallegationagainstthe Petitionershereinthattheyweresmokinginapublicplace. Therefore,^{the Petitioners cannotbe charged with Section21 of} COTP Act, 2003

¶409

Further, the^{ingredients of Section22 of tbe COTP Act'} 2003 are also^{not attracted. There is nothing to suggest that the} Petitioners in^{anyrvay advertised cigarettes and other tobacco} products rvhich^{is prohibited under Section5 of the COTP Act'} 2003. The allegations^{only pertain to transportation'sale'} possession, manufacture,^{storage and do not includeadvertisement}

¶410

-*---

¶411

KL,J Crl.P. No.56l9 of2020 & bqtch

¶412

¶413

-lff ill ttii4 ilii 'i1 t, l ,:

¶414

lo,

¶415

i i i

¶416

of such products. Therefore, the Petitioners cannot be charged with Section 22 of COTP Act, 2003.

¶417

In view of the abovesaid discussion, all these Criminal Petitions except Crl.P. No.7455 of 2021 are allowed quashing the proceedings in the respective Crimes/Calendar Cases/Sessions Cases in terms of the cornmon order, dated 05.07,2021 passed by this Court in Mohd. Jamcel Ahmed (Supra).

¶418

However. it is relevant to note that in Crl. P. No.7,1-5-5 of 2021, the petitioner - accused rvas chargecl * itli Sections - 270 and 273 of the IPC and Section - 8 (c) read with Section - 20 (b) olthe NDPS Act. The allegation against the petitioner in the said case is that he was found in possession of tobacco products and ganja. Therefore, the said Crl.P. No.7455 of 2021 is partly allowed and Crime No.148 of 2021 is quashed as far as the offences under Sections - 270 and273 of the IPC are concemed. The Investigating Officer shall proceed with the investigation in relation to the allegations and offence under Section - 8 (c) read with Section - 20 (b) of the NDPS Act

¶419

Crl.P. No.5619 of 2020 &batc

¶420

¶421

I 3. As the proceedings in the atbresaid Criminal Petitions are quashed against the respective petitioners, the respective Station House Olllcers^/lnv estigat ing OlJlcers are hereby directed to rctum the seized propcrtyi vehic les on proper identilication and verification of ownership under due acknowledgment. In cases where charge sheets are already filed the respective petitioners are at liberty to file appropriate applications before the concerned Magistrate for retum of the seized property/vehicle and the Magistrate shall consider the same in accordance with law.

¶422

However, it is made clear that if the seized stock of tobacco products or other products are expired, the same shall be dcstroyed by taking pennission tiom the concemed Magistrate.

¶423

During the course ol hearing, it was brougirt to the notice of this Courl that the learned Magistrates are receiving lemand ot'accused and sending them to^judicial remand for the aforesaid o fll'ences without going though the order dated 05.07.2021 passed by this Court in Mohd. Jameel Ahmed. In view of the same, the Registrar (Judicial) is directed to circulate a copy ofthis order and a copy ofthe said order dated 05.07.2021 to

¶424

KL,J Crl.P. No.56l9 of2020 & botch

vl ,]

: {iI1 ll,

I I i

iI I