Allowed¶37

Gone Ilaiah, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Jun 2025CRLP/7201/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PDS rice procurement from beneficiaries; Essential Commodities Act 1955 Ss.7 & 8; S.318(a) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha (cheating, criminal breach of trust); quash of FIR under S.528 BNSS; abuse of process; FIR No.39/2025 PS Kesamudram, Mahabubabad; seizure of 25.750 quintals on 14.02.2025; High Court for the State of Telangana; Crl.P. No.7201 of 2025; coordinate bench Crl.P.No.13758 of 2018.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition allowed; the proceedings in FIR No.39 of 2025 of PS Kesamudram, Mahabubabad District, against the petitioner/accused are quashed; miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand closed. ¶37

Gone Ilaiah, Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings in FIR No.39 of 2025 of PS Kesamudram, Mahabubabad District, against the petitioner/accused are liable to be quashed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. +1 more

¶23

Court's answer

Continuance of the proceedings in FIR No.39 of 2025 against the petitioner is an abuse of process of the Court, warranting quashment under Section 528 of BNSS.

¶36

Ratio / Principle

Procuring PDS rice from the beneficiaries after supply from the dealer does not amount to intervening with the supply, distribution or trade of the PDS rice, as the material rice had already reached the beneficiary; hence the contravention contemplated by Sections 7 and 8 of the Essential Commodities Act is not made out.

¶33

Key takeaways

There is no averment that the petitioner deceptively induced the beneficiaries to part with the supplied PDS rice, or that a beneficiary entrusted the purchased PDS rice to him and he dishonestly misappropriated or converted it to his own use or used it in violation of a lawful direction or contract; in the absence of these essential factors the Court found it a fit case to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (N. Tukaramji, J.) allowed a criminal petition under S.528 BNSS and quashed FIR No.39 of 2025 of PS Kesamudram, Mahabubabad District, in which the petitioner/accused was alleged to have procured PDS rice from beneficiaries at a cheaper rate for profitable resale and was found in possession of 25.750 quintals on 14.02.2025, facing charges under S.318(a) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha and Ss.7 & 8 Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Holding that procurement after the rice had reached the beneficiaries amounts to no intervention with supply, distribution or trade, and that absent deceptive inducement of beneficiaries or entrustment with subsequent dishonest misappropriation the essential ingredients of cheating and criminal breach of trust were absent, the Court held continuance of the proceedings to be an abuse of process, placing reliance on a coordinate bench decision in Crl.P.No.13758 of 2018 on identical facts.

¶1

13217l

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶3

AT HYDERABAD

¶4

MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7201 oF 2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

Qone^{llaiah,, S/o Yakambram,Age. 39years,} Occ.^Business, R/o.Mahamoodpatnam Village, Kesamudiam Mandal, Mahabubabad District.

¶10

... Petitioner/Accused

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana,, rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad, Through The SHO Kesamudram police station, Mahabubabad District.

¶13

... Respon de nUCom plaina nt

¶14

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in FIR No. 39 of 2O2S on the file the Court of Judicial First class Magistrate At lvlahabubabad, Mahabubabad District, against the Petitioner.

¶15

l.A. NO: 2OF 2025

¶16

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS 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 against the petitioner/Accused in FIR No. 39 oI 2025 on the file the Court Of Judicial First Class Magistrate At Mahabubabad, Mahabubabad District inctuding dispense with the appearance of the petitioner till-the disposal of the main quash petition in the interest of the justice.

¶17

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Laxmaiah Kanchani, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

¶20

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI

¶21

c RIMINAL PETITION No.7201 ot²⁰²⁵

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

This petition is filed under Section 528 of^{BharatiyaNagarik} Suraksha Sanhita, 2023^(for short^{'BNSS, 2023') seeklng quashment} of the proceedings in FIR No.39 of 2025^{of PS Kesamudram,} Mahabubabad District, against the^{petitioner/accused.}

¶24

Heard Mr.Laxmaiah Kanchani, learned counsel for^petitioner- accused, Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla,^{learnedAdditional Public} Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State

¶25

The petitioner is arrayed as accused in FIR No.39^{of 2025 for} the offences under Section 318(a) of the Bharatiya^{NyayaSanhitha} and Sections 7 and B of Essential Commodities^{Act, .1955(for short} 'the Act').

¶26

The specific allegation against the^{petitioner/accusedis that he} has procured PDS rice from the beneficiaries at^{chealler rate to sell} the same for^profit and on 14.02.2025 at about^{06.00hrs;, the petitioner} was found in possession of 9^gunny bags and^{17 plastic bags of PDS} rice totalling 25.750 quintals.

¶27

¶28

¶29

NTR,J CRL.P No.7201of2025

¶30

Learned counsel for the^{petitionerwould submit that without} there being any complaint^{from any beneficiary,the rice was procured} deceptively or with a criminal intent,^{chargingthe petitionerfor} prosecution is untenable and improper. The^{allegationson his face} value cannot be sustained against^{the alleged offences. Further, this} Court in Crl.P.Nos.5709^{of 2019 and 33493of 2015 while considering} the selfsame situation^{categorically observed that the offencesalleged} against the^{petitioner therein cannotbe continuedand quashedthe} proceedings. The petitioner also^{entitledto same relief,hence prayed} for quash the^{proceedings against the petitioner.}

¶31

I have perused the materials^{on record.}

¶32

As per the^{prosecution,this offence said to have been} committed by the^{petitioner is cheating, criminal breach of trust and} violation of Sections 7^{and 8 of the Act.}

¶33

Sections 7 and B of the^{Act contemplatethat any person} contravenes with the^{production,supply, distribution and tradeof} essential commodities or^{abatement in this regardis punishable'As} per the prosecution, the^{petitioner has procuredPDS rice from the} benefic-iaries after supply^{from the dealer' The situation doesnot} amount either intervening with^{the supply or distribution or trade of the} PDS rice, as the material rice had^{reached the beneficiary'}

¶34

¶35

NTR,J CRr- P.No.7201 oI2025

¶36

That apart, there is no averment indicating that tl're petitioner in any way deceptively induced the beneficiaries to part with the supplied PDS rice or and beneficiary entrusted the PDS rice purohased by him with the petitioner and he dishonestly misappropriated or converted his own use or used it in violation of a lawful direction or contract. ln the absence of essential factors, on the face of prosecut,on this Court finds it fit case to exercise the^jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS. Further, this Court in Crl.P.No.13758 of 201B a Coordinate bench of this Court has considered identical case facts and drawn Similar conclusions. Thus, continuance of proceedings against the petitioner is found abuse of process.

¶37

For the aforesaid, this petition is allowed and the prroceedings in FIR No.39 of 2025 of PS Kesamudram, Mahabubabad District, against the petitioner/accused, are hereby quashed. .

¶38

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶39

SD/- A.V.S.PRASAD DEPUry REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPYII

To,

SECTION OFFICER

The Additional Judicial First Clalss Magistrate at Mahabubabad.

¶44

The station House officer Kesamudrair ioric" btation, Mahibubao District 3. Two CCs to the^pubtic prosecutor, High coJrt ro.irie St;ia; ;i T;t;;g;il';i Hyderabad [OUT]

¶45