Allowed¶53

T. Srinivasa Rao, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC11 Dec 2025CRLP/16198/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: quash FIR; Section 528 BNSS 2023; PDS rice; procurement from beneficiaries at cheaper rate; 297.45 quintals; 05.02.2025; Section 318(a) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 (cheating); Section 7 Essential Commodities Act 1955; FIR No.25 of 2025; Madnoor Police Station; Kamareddy; abuse of process; coordinate bench precedent followed; CRLP 16198 of 2025; Justice J Sreenivas Rao; High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad; 11.12.2025; Ch. Ravinder for petitioner; Jithendar Rao Veeramalla Additional Public Prosecutor.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the proceedings in FIR No.25 of 2025 of Madnoor Police Station, Kamareddy District, against the petitioner/accused No.1; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stood closed. ¶53

T. Srinivasa Rao, Vs The State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the proceedings in FIR No.25 of 2025 of Madnoor Police Station, Kamareddy District, against the petitioner/accused No.1; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stood closed.

¶53

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings in FIR No.25 of 2025 of Madnoor Police Station, Kamareddy District, against the petitioner/A-1 (offences under Section 318(a) BNS, 2023 and Section 7 EC Act, 1955) ought to be quashed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. +1 more

¶28

Court's answer

Since the facts and circumstances of the present case are similar to those of the coordinate bench decision, the Court found it a fit case to exercise jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS and, applying the same analogy, to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

¶48

Ratio / Principle

The Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in FIR No.25 of 2025 of Madnoor Police Station, Kamareddy District, against the petitioner/accused No.1 are hereby quashed.

¶53

Key takeaways

The Court recorded that Section 7 of the EC Act contemplates punishment of any person who contravenes in relation to the production, supply, distribution and trade of essential commodities.obiter¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (J. Sreenivas Rao, J.), CRLP.No.16198 of 2025, decided 11.12.2025 - Quashing of FIR under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 - Petitioner/A-1 alleged to have procured PDS rice from beneficiaries at a cheaper rate to sell for profit and found in possession of 297.45 quintals of PDS rice on 05.02.2025 - FIR No.25 of 2025, Madnoor Police Station, Kamareddy District, for offences under Section 318(a) BNS, 2023 and Section 7 EC Act, 1955 - No complaint from any beneficiary and no material indicating deceptive inducement or criminal intent - Facts similar to a coordinate bench decision (Crl.P.No.?2j of 2025) where continuation of proceedings was held to be abuse of process - Applying the same analogy, Criminal Petition allowed and proceedings against petitioner/A-1 quashed; pending miscellaneous applications closed.

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITI ON NO: 16198 0F 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

T.. Srinivasa Rao, S/o Hanumantha Rao, Aged about 5't years, occ: Business. F/o.. 7-292, Main Road, Chaltagundta Viilage, Nekari6ffu,-'CuniuiIn;"# Pradesh

¶9

...PETITIONER/A.1

¶10

The State of Tetangana, n"S qfrry8 pubtic prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana tiydeiabad, f'frrough SHO frlaOnooip.S.,k;;;;d;:^'

¶11

The Deputy Tahsitdar (Civit Suppties), Madnoor, Kamareddy ,[,:,:l:Ott RESPONDENT NO.2/COMPLAINANT

¶12

Petition under Section S28 of BNSS, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of crimin'al petition, the High court may be may be pleased to quash the FIR No.25 of 2025 on the file of Madnoor Police station, Kamareddy, insofar as the petitioner/A-1 is concerned.

¶13

LA. NO: 2OF 2025

¶14

Petition under Section S2B of BNSS, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of climiial petition, the High court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings in rtR ruo.zs or )ozs on the file of Madnoor Police station, Kamareddy, insofai as the petitioner/A-1, pending disposal of the main criminal petition.

¶15

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri cH RAVINDER, Advocate for the petitioner and of sri JTTHENDER RAo VEERAIVALLA, Additional Public prosecutor for the state of relangana on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None appeared for Respondent no.2 .

¶16

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶17

TN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TI,LANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶18

THE HONOT,TRABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SRBENl VAS RAO

¶19

CRIMTNAL PETITION No.I 6198 of 2t) 15

Date:11.12.2025

Between:

T. Srinivasa Rao

F:titioner

AND

The State of l'clangana, Rep. by its public Prosecutor, IJ igh Court fbr the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad through SHO, Madnoor P.S. and anothcr

¶26

Respondents

¶27

: ORDER:

¶28

This Crin.rinal Petition has bcen filed seeking to quash the

¶29

proceedings in FIR No.25 ot'2025. of Madnoor t< Iice Station,

¶30

Kamareddy District, registered tbr the ofl-e nces pur i ;lrable under Section 318(a) ol rhe Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2(rj 3 (for short 'BNS') and Section 7 olthe EssentiaI Comrnodiries ,1 ;t, 1955 (for short 'EC Act').

¶31

\ qE-!{l!Ed

¶32

¶33

Heard Mr.Ch.Ravinder, learned counsel for the petitioner - and Mr.Jithendar Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional Public Prosecutor lor respondent No. l.

¶34

Thc spccific allegation against the petitioner/accused No.l is that he has procured PDS rice frorn the beneficiaries at cheaper ratc to sell the same lor profit and on05.02.2025 at about l1-10 hours, the petitioncr rvas lound in possession of 297.45 quintals of PDS rlce

¶35

Learned counsel lor the petitioner would submit that without

¶36

there being any complaint from any bcneficiary, alleging that the rlce was procured deceptivcly or with a criminal intent and charging the petitioner lor prosecution is untenable and improper The allegations, even taken at his face value cannot be sustained against the petitioner. Further, this Court, in Crl.P.Nos.5709 of 2019 and 3i49 ol- l0l 5, rvhitc considering the sarne situation, categoricalli, obscrved that the offences alleged against the petitioners therein could not be continued and accordingly quashed the proceedings. The petitioner is also entitled to the same relief and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner

¶37

¶38

I \

¶39

The leamed Additional Public Prosecutor subL: its rliat as per

¶40

prosecution, the offences said to have been conrr-ritted by the petitioner is cheating and violation ol Section 7 ol'rl-: E(l Act and requested to pass appropriate orders

¶41

Section 7 of thc EC Act contemplates tlr r an)/ persoll contravenes with the production, suppll', distributior ancl trade of essential comntodities, is punishable. As pcr thc pr1 secution, the petitioner has procured PDS ricc lion-r thc bcnt I ciar.ics after supply from the dealer

¶42

A Coordinate Bench ol'this Court in ('r.l.p.No ?2j of 2025

¶43

has considered the identical facts and observcd thal

¶44

"'l'herc is no drermc t indi(t tng tltut tha p(tilioner ttt otv 4,uy deceptivell ineh(ad the htnefciurics to lLr.t vith thc supplrr,t )[)S rtce or the benLfictur.l) entrtL\td tht' I'DS ritt' lnrrcltuul b.y, tlt,,,,t rt,ilh tha pelitioner und the.y dislnne-stly nisappnpriotecl ()1.convrt.t ( to tlL:ir ov n use or usei it in violotiort of o lorful tlirectiort <r- ( ottt , ( Itl the absence of essentialfoctor.s, on lhc luce of yosecutton, thrs t t |tt.fintls it to ba a.fit cu.sL,to exerLi.se the juisdictiotr urttler Sccliott -t,.. ,/ /J..:!l 2023. 7'hus, c<tntinuan<a rf proccad tg.s ttguinst tltt pctititn,r i.y ubuse of proce.ss of lat^'

¶45

\ (

¶46

8 The facts and circumstances ol the present cas,t also sirnilar

¶47

to those in the above case and hence, this Cour-t fintl: t to be a fit

¶48

casc to exercise .jurisdiction under Seclion 528 r,l BNSS bv

¶49

¶50

¶51

applying the same analogy and to quash the proceedings against

¶52

the petitioner herein.

¶53

Accordingly, thc Crirninal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in IrlR No.25 of 2025, ol Madnoor Police Station, are Kamareddy District, against the petitioner/accused No. I ,

¶54

hereby quashed.

¶55

Pending misccllarreous applications. if any, shall stand

¶56

closed.

¶57

SD/- A.H.S. GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G

¶58

//TRUE COPY//

¶59

SECTION OFFICER