Partly allowed

Kothapally Ravi v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC26 Apr 2023CRLP/11075/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of multiple Criminal Petitions under Section 482 CrPC concerning offenses related to purchasing and selling Public Distribution System (PDS) rice. The Court distinguished the earlier Maimuna Begum judgment based on the introduction of Clause 17(e) in the 2016 Control Order, holding that cases registered after 19.08.2016 cannot be quashed.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petitions 11057 and 11372 allowed; proceedings against petitioners in C.C. 704 of 2018 and 884 of 2019 quashed; others dismissed.

Kothapally Ravi Vs The State of Telangana — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

[³²⁵¹ I

It i

I I I 'f

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

¶7

WEDNESDAY,^{THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY THREE}

¶8

PRESENT

¶9

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICE K.SURENDER}

¶10

CRIMINAL^{PETITION NO: 824 OF2020606 ot 2O21}

¶11

110s7 .11075,11372,6727^{. 9405 and 11877 of 2022}

¶12

Between:

¶13

l.YerraBhumanna,S/o.Narayana,Age.49yrs.,Occ'Business,Ri/o'Pedda Bellal of Kadam^{lvtandal, Nirmal District,T.S}

¶14

1. Sampangi Laxman @^{Kondapur Laxman,S/o. Hanm-anthu, Age 40, Occ'} fisn Faciory Businesi^{Fl/o. Kadamof NirmalDistrctT S'}

¶15

Ena Shekar, S/o.^{Prabhakar, Age. 40 yrs. Occ. Business,R/o' Jinnaram} village of lt{anciryal^District.

¶16

...PETITIONERYACCUSED^{NO.1 TO 3}

¶17

AND

¶18

The'State of Telangana,^{Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High court of Hyderabad'}

¶19

2.MohammedRaheemuddin,s/o.Tajuddin,Age36yrs.,Occ-NaibTahsildar' - nyo.H.tlo.O-2- 199, Hussainpur, Rahmath Nagar, PDPDL Road, Karimnagar'

¶20

...RESPONDENTS

¶21

Petition under section^{482 of cr.P.cpraying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Grounds of criminalPetition, the High court may} be^pleased to^quash all^{the proceedingsagainst the_ Petitioners/accused No'1 to} 3 in c,c.No.45o ot^{zots on the file of the LearnedAdditional Judicial First class} Magistrate at Nirmal,^{Nirmal District undersection 7 of Essentialcommodities} Aciarose out of Crime^{No.67 of 2019 dt.13-04-2019 of Police Station Kadam}

¶22

l.A. NO: 1OF 2020

¶23

Petition under section^{482 of cr.P.cpraying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminal Petitioh, the High court may} ue pteaseo to stay^{all the proceedings against the petitioners/ AccusedNo.1to 3} inciuding their^{peisonal appearancein C.C.No. No.456 of 2019 on the file of the} Learned-Additional^{JudiciaiFirst ClassMagistrateat Nirmal, Nirmal District under} section 7 0f Essential^{commodities Act, aroseout of crimeNo.67 0f 2019 dt.13-} O4-2OlgofPoliceStationKadam,pendingdisposalofthequashpetition

¶24

¶25

ThisPetitioncomingonforhearing;'uponperusingthelt/lemorandumof GroundsofCriminalPetitionanduponhearingtheargumentsoflt,4/sP.D. vINEELA, Advocate^{for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalfof the} Respondent^{No.1 and none appearedfor the Respondent No 2'}

¶26

The Court made^{the following: ORDER}

¶27

CRIMINAL PETITIO^{NNO : 606 OF 2021}

¶28

Between:

¶29

Kummari Vijay Kumar,^{S/o. Chandraiah, Aged about2^lU.9a.r1'O:"1-B-u?';11":'} ii/.. sh;"idftgar,^{ziheerabadtown,sangaReddy District (erstwhile Medak} District).

¶30

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED^No'1

¶31

AND

¶32

l.TheStateofTelangana'Rep.byitsPublicProsecutorHighCourtat Hyderabad.

¶33

...,I.t RESPONDENT/STATE

¶34

2.SriM.Dasharath,S/o.Pentaiah,Agedabout56years,Occ'Dy'Tahsildar' Sangareddy town,^{Sangareddy District.}

¶35

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS

¶36

Petition under section^{482 of cr.P.cprayingthat in the circumslances} statedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighCourtmqy be pleased to call^{for the records in connection with crimeNo.'176of 2020 on the} fite, Jogipet Police station,^{Sanga Reddy District and quash the crimeNo.176 of} 2020 against the Petitioner

¶37

¶38

I.A. No;2 0F 2021

¶39

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 respondentsto releasethe 300 quintals (700bags) of} rice'ot tne^{petitioner along witfr TATA Lorry bearing No. GJ 03 BW 9477 seized} under covei of^{panchaiama dated 27.9.2020 in CrimeNo.'l 76 of 2020 on the file} of Jogipet Police^{Station, Sanga Reddy District, pending disposal of the main} Criminal Petition

¶40

ThiS Petition coming on^{for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandumof} Grounds of Criminal Petition and^{upon hearingthe arguments ofSri} SOMAVARAPU SATYANARAYANA ,Advocate^{for the Petitioner and the Public} Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2

¶41

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶42

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11057 OF 2022

¶43

¶44

Between:

¶45

Bhanuru Nagender, S/o B Krishnaiah, Aged about 60 Years, OCC. Owner of the Sri Vasavi lndustry and Diguardigeter,^{Fl/oH.No.42-259,KDR Nagar, New} Ganj, Wanaparthy, Wanaparthy District.

¶46

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶47

AND

¶48

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

¶49

...RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶50

M.Sudershan Reddy, age not known, Tahsildar, Wanaparthy, District Wanaparthy.

¶51

..RESPONDENT/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 quash the proceedings against the Petitioner in CC No. 704 of 2018 on the file of Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Wanaparthy, Wanaparthy District in the circumstances mentioned above to meet the ends of justice'

¶53

l.A. NO: 'l OF 2022

¶54

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 stay of all further^proceeding including appearance of the^petitioner in CC No. 704 of 2018 on the file of Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Wanaparthy, Wanaparthy District^pending disposal of the main case and to^pass

¶55

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^{PublicProsecutor} on behalf of the Respond6nt No. 1 and none appeared^{for the Respondent No. 2.}

¶56

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶57

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1'1075 OF 2022

¶58

Between:

¶59

Kothapally Ravi, S/o. Shankar, Aged 36^years, Occupation^R4ionShop Dealei, Rio. H.No. 8-1111 , Mupkal^Village and^{Mandal, Nizamabad District.}

¶60

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶61

¶62

AND

¶63

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

¶64

..,RESPONDENTS

¶65

Petition under Sectlon 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances slated in the [V'lemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the CC No. 434 of 2022 on the file of Judicial lvlagistrate of First Class, at Armoor, pending against the Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶66

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2022

¶67

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P .C praying that in the circumstances stated in the [t/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in CC No. 434 of 2022 on the file of Judicial lvlagistrate of First Class, at Armoor

¶68

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri R. NAGARJUNA REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Re5pondent.

¶69

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶70

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:^'t1372 OF 2022

¶71

Between:

¶72

Enishetty Sudarshan, S/o. Pentaiah Aged about 57 Years Occ. Business, Rl/o. Cheekatimamidi Village, Bommalaramaram' Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District.

¶73

...PETITIONERS/ACCUS E D

¶74

AND

¶75

The Hyderabad..State^{of Telangana,rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Courtat}

¶76

...RESPONDENT

¶77

2 Karivedi Anantha Rama Rao, S/o. Appa Rao, Aged about 60 years, Occ. Revenue lnspector Fi/o. Bhongiri,^yadadari Bhuvanagiri District.

¶78

.,.RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶79

¶80

Petition under Section 482 o't Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the fVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Quash the in C.C. No. 884 o'f 2019 On the file of the Additional Judicial First Class l\ilagistrate at Bhongir, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District in the interest of^justice

¶81

LA. NO: 2OF 2022

¶82

Petition under Section 482 o'f Cr.P.C praying that rn 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 C.C. No. 884 of 20'19 On the file of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Bhongir, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District pending disposal of the main Criminal Petition

¶83

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri A. JAGAN, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (TG/AP) on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2.

¶84

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶85

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6727 OF 2022

¶86

Between:

¶87

Birru Sandeep, S/o. Venkanna, Aged about 24 Years, Occ.Unempolyed, R/o. A9qr.tt _N$qt^{Colony,KesamudramVillageand Mandal,Mahabubabad} District-S061 12.

¶88

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.2

¶89

AND

¶90

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

¶91

G.Kishna Sio. Not Known, Occ Head Constable No.2178, Kesamudram Police Station, at Kesamudram, Mahabubabad District-506'l 12

¶92

...RESPONDENTS

¶93

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 pertaining to the C.C. No. 11 of 2022 in the Court of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Mahabubabad and quash the same against the petitioner

E;E$pry

l.A, NO: 2 OF 2022

Petition under Seclion 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the crrcumstances 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 petitioner in C.C. No. 11 of 2022 in the Court of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at [Mahabubabad pending the disposal of the above quash petition.

¶98

This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri B. BALAJI, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2.

¶99

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶100

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9405 OF 2022

¶101

Between:

¶102

Manikanta Rathod, S/o Narendra Rathod, aged About 34 years, occ. Business, r/o H.No. 1-1-42 Sri Lakshmi Timmappa Trading and General Merchant, Shop No.4, APMC Yard, Yadgir Gurmitkal Town and Panchayat, Karnataka-,

¶103

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No. 4

¶104

AND

¶105

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., Nacharam Police Statiori, Rachakonda Commissionerate, R.R.District, rep By Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶106

M.Srinivas, Dy. Tahsildar, Uppal Mandal, Medchal District

¶107

...RESPONDENTS/COM PLAINANT

¶108

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 the charge sheet in C.C..No.1890 of 2020 on the file of the V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-l Additional Junior Civil Judge, Uppal at L.B.Nagar, M.M. District, and quash the proceedings

¶109

l.A. NO: 1OF 2022

¶110

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 the appearance oi the petitioner in c.c..No.i890 of 2020 on the file of the V Additional Metropolitan Masistrate-cum-r Additionar Junior civil Judge, uppal at L.B.Nagar, trl.la. rilstriit, pending disposal of the Criminal petition

¶111

¶112

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lr/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M- RATHAN SINGH, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and none appeared for the^{Respondent No. 2.}

¶113

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶114

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1'1877 OF 2022

¶115

Between:

¶116

Enishetty Sudarshan, S/o. Pentaiah Aged about 57 Years Occ- Business, Rl/o. Cheekatimamidi Village Bommalaramaram Mandal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District.

¶117

Dheeravath Malu, S/o. Devula Aged about 30 Years Caste Lambada Occ. Agrl Rl/o. Komatikunta Thanda

¶118

Madoth Mangya Naik, S/o. Bichya Aged about 35 Years Occ. Agrl R/o. Kanchal Thanda

¶119

Guguloth Sharath Chandra @ Shankar, S/o. Bojya Aged about 27 Years Caste Lambada Occ. Plumber Rl/o. Jagya Thanda H/o. Malkapuram Village of Thurkapally Mandal.

¶120

Thejavath meetya, S/o. Valya Aged about 30 Years Caste lmbada Occ. Lorry Driver R/o. Kandlakunta Thanda

¶121

Eheeravath Shankar, S/o. Yadagiri Aged about 30 Years, Caste Lambada Occ. Agriculture Rl/o. Kanchal Thanda Village Of Bommalaramaram Mandal.

¶122

Ma$oth Linga, S/o. Haniya Aged about 35 Years caste Lambada Occ. Agribulture R/o. Kanchal Thanda

¶123

Shazad Khan, S/o. Gulab Khan, Aged about 35 Years Occ. Driver of DCM Van Bearing TS 12-UA -0359 Ryo. H No. 7-'14-754, Khoja Colony, Nizamabad

¶124

lmtiyaz Hussen, S/o. Abubhai Memon Aged about 40 Years Occ. Business & DCM R/o. 7-14-191 , Habeeb Nagar Nizamabad.

¶125

...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No. 1 to 9

¶126

AND

¶127

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

¶128

...RESPONDENT

¶129

K. Venkatesh, S/o Not Known, Aged about40 Years, Occ. Sub-lnspector Of Police B ommalaramaram P. S Rl/o. Bhongiri, Yadadari Bhuvanagiri District.

¶130

...RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶131

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

¶132

be pleased to Quash the in c.c. No 410 of 2019 on the fire of the Additionar Judicial First Class l\4urgistrate at Bhongir in the interest of justice

¶133

l.A. NO: 'l OF 2022

¶134

Petition under Section 482 of cr.p .c praying that in the circumstances stated in the lrrlemorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of a[ further proceedings, in c.c. No. 410 of 2019 on the file of the Additionar Judicial First class Magistrate at Bhongir pending disposal of the main Cr-iminal petition

¶135

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the fVemorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri A. JAGAN, Advocate for the Petitioner and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2.

¶136

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶137

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 824 of 2O2O 606 of 2O2l 11o57, 11075. L1372,6727,94OS and L7877 of2022

¶138

COMMON ORDER:

¶139

l. Criminal Petition No. 11075 of 2022 is filed questionrng the prosecution against the petitioner in C.C.No.434 of 2022 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Armoor for the offences under Sections 42O IPC, Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short the Act of 1955') and Clause l7(e) of Telangana State F\rblic Distribution System (Control) Order, 20L6 (for short 'the Order).

¶140

It is the case of the prosecution that on 10. 1I.2022, the petitioner was found transporting PDS rise. On the basis of investigation that PDS rice was being purchased and sold in turn for proht, case was registered.

¶141

Criminzrl Petition No.6727 of 2022 is hled to quash the proceedings against the petitioner in CC No. I 1 of 2022 on the Iile of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Mahubabad for the offences under Sections 42O of IPC arrd Sections 7 & 8 of the Act of 1955.

¶142

\ .- . .^:

¶143

¶144

It is the case of tl'rc prosecution the petitioner was stopped and touncl PDS ricc in his vehicle. The said PDS rice was procured at a cheaper rate and sold for proht. The Police, Kesamudram hled charge sheet for the offences under Section 42O IPC and Sections 7 & 8 of the Act of 1955.

¶145

Criminal Petition No. 11057 of 2022 is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.704 of 2018 on the hle of Judicial Magistratc of First Class at Wanaparthy for the offences Section 42O lPC and Sections 7 & 8 of the Act of 1955. It is the case of the prosecution that the^police Wanaparthy on 08.08.2014 found 206 quintals of PDS rice, which was seized and investigated.

¶146

Criminal Petition No B24 of 2O2O is filed to quash the proceedings againsL the petitioners in C.C.No.456 of 2019 on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nirmal for the offences Section 42O IPC and Section 7 of the Act of 1955. It is the case o[ the prosecution that the Police Kadam found the accused collectrng PDS rice from card holders at cheaper rate, which was detected and premises were

¶147

¶148

./:

¶149

searched on 13.O4.2O1 7. pDS rice was found, seized and investigation done. The accused a_re charge sheeted for the offences under Sections 42O IpC and Section 7 of the Act.

¶150

Criminal petition No.9405 of 2022 is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No. lggo of 2O2O on the hle of V Additional Metropolitan Magistrate_cum_l Additional Junior Civil Judge, Uppal at L.B.Nagar for the offences Section 42O IpC and Section Z of theAct of 1955. It is the case of the prosecution that the police Nacharam and civil supplies officials raided the premises on I i.0g.2019 and found PDS rice. The said rice about 300 quintals was seized.

¶151

Criminal petition No.6O6 of 2027 is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner in crime No. 176 of 2o2o on the file of Jogipet police Station, Sanga Reddy District for the offences Section 42O tpc and Section 7 of the Act of 1955. It is the case of the prosecution that the Depuer Tahsitdar, Civil Supplies seized lorry transporting pDS r rice and accordingly handed over to the police for the purpose of investigation.

¶152

¶153

.
:"'r; '*.i€?.-i
.,.

¶154

Criminal Petition No i 1372 of 2022 is hled to^quash the proceedings aqainst tl'rc ltctitioner in C.C.No.8B4 of 2019^on the hle of Additional Juclicial First Ciass^Magistrateat Bhongir for the oflenccs Section 42O IPC and^{Section 7(1) of} the Act of 1955. It is thc case of the^{prosecutionthat on} O7.O3.2O15 aL 2.OO p.m,^{PDS rice was seizedwhich was} found fil1ed in^gunny bags^{The said rice was stored for selling} at higher price to customcrs.^{Therefore, offence underSection} 42O and 7(1) of the Act of^{1955 is made out.}

¶155

Criminal Petition^{No I 1877 of 2022 is hled to quash the} proceedings against the pctitioner in^{C.C.No.41Oof 2019.on} the file of Additionat Judicial^{First ClassMagistrateat} Bhongir for the offences Section^{42O IPC and Section 7(1) of} the Act of 1955. It is^{thc case of the prosecutionthat on} 06.06.2017 at 3.00 p.m, three^{vehicles carryingPDS rise were} intercepted and seized. On the^{basis of carryingPDS rice and} for being in possession of^{PDS rice, complaintwas filed.}

¶156

¶157

Since issues involved in all the criminai petitions are

¶158

one and they same, they are being disposed of by way of this

¶159

Common Order.

¶160

L2. This Court in Criminal Petition Nos.82 of 2021 & batch,

¶161

at paragraphs 21 to 24 held as follows:

¶162

It is also releuant to note that clause 17 of the TSpDgA Order, 201 6 deals uith penalties for possessing cards, making false^{entries or diuerting} stocks. As per clause 17(e) of the fSPDge Order, 2O16, if any person is found to haue purcho.sed the ice supplied through pDS either from the cardholder or fair price shop dealer or any other source, he shall be liable for criminal action and imposition of penalty as mag be ftxed bA the competent authority.

¶163

In Maimuna Begum (supra), the Diuision Bench, consideing the uery same allegation i.e. detenus therein purchased ice meant for 11 public distribution sgstem, it was held that alleged actiuity of the detenus purchasing the pDS rice from card holder etc., completely falls outside Cliuse 1Z(A) of the Control Order, 20O8. Once tlrcre is no prohibition on such actiuitg either under the I99S Act or under th.e Control Order, 20OB tuhich undisputedlg is the onlA order that gouems distibution and control of rice meant for publb distrtbution sAstem, the detenus cannot be accused of committing any offence.

¶164

As stated aboue, the Gouemment of Telangana in exercise of pouers under Section 3 read uith S of the EC Act that and in terms of the order of ttrc Mtnistry of Centrat Affairs Ciuil Supplies, and Public Distibution, Gouernment of india, GSR No.213(3), dated 20.03.2015, in supercession oy lne A.f. State Public Distibution Sgstem(Controt) Order, 20b8 issued G.O. Ms. No. 2 9, dated 1 9.08. 2O 1 6 promulgating the ?SPDS(C) Order, 2016.

¶165

In uiew of the same, the principle laid down in Maimuna Begum (supra| is not applicable to the facts of the present case. In the present cases. T'lere are specific allegations of purchase of ice from ttLe cardholders which is afier introduction of clause 17 (e) of the Control Order 2016 and the satd judgment is applicable only to a case uhich falls pior to the introduction of the satd prouiston.

¶166

¶167

¶168

The rice and padd.v^{zrre essential commoditiesunder} Clause 17(e) ol the^{C)rd<:r and thc sarne \/as introducedon} 79.08.2016. [\rrchase ol^{PDS rice from card holders or} dealing in any manner^{is made as art olfence ln the present} petitions, olfence is one^{of purchase, search, sale and illegal} transportation of^{PDS rise. which is incontraventionof} Clause 17(e) of the^{Order and made punishablecriminally'}

¶169

In the said^{circumstances,the casesregistered after} 19.08.20'16cannotbequashedanditisforthepetitioners herein to workout^{their remedies beforethe trial Court'}

¶170

In the result,^{the proceedingsagainst the petitioners in} C.C.No.TO4of2ol8onthefileofJudicialMagistrateofFirst Class at Walaparthy^{and also the proceedings againstthe} petitioner in C.C.No'884^{of 2Ol9 on the hle of Additional} Judicial First^{Class Magistrate atBhongir, are hereby} quashed.

¶171