Allowed

Konda Laxman v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Sept 2026CRLP/14369/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court quashed criminal proceedings against the petitioner accused of procuring PDS rice from beneficiaries, holding that the charge sheet lacked essential ingredients of cheating and violation of the Essential Commodities Act. Following a coordinate bench decision in Crl.P.No.7227 of 2025 on identical facts, the court found no evidence that the petitioner deceived beneficiaries or that they dishonestly misappropriated the rice, making continuation of proceedings an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No.1815 of 2025 against the petitioner/Accused No.2 quashed.

Konda Laxman Vs The State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶3

AT HYDERABAD

¶4

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 14369 OF 2026

¶8

Between:

¶9

Konda Laxman, S/o. Late Lachaiah, Age. 53^years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.^No. 5-4-214, Vanjari Wada, Jagtial Proper and District.

¶10

...Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., P.S Jagtial Rural, Jagtial^District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

¶13

. .. Respondent

¶14

2 Kukatla Umapathi, S/o. Rama Chandram, Occ. Naib Tahasildar^(Civil Supply), R/o. Tank Road, Sulthanabad.

¶15

...RespondenUDefacto Complainant

¶16

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High^{Court may be pleased to} quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.1815 ol 2025, on the file of Hon'ble Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate at^{Jagtial, as against the} petitioner/ Accused No. 2.

¶17

l.A. NO: 1OF 2026

¶18

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^{praying thatin the circumstances statedin} the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition, the High Court may be pleasedto} stay of all further^proceedings including appearance^{of the petitioner/Accused No. 2} in C.C.No.1815 ot 2025, on the file of^{Hon'ble PrincipalJunior Civil Judge-cum-} Judicial First Class Magistrate at Jagtial

¶19

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^{perusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of Criminal Petition and^{upon hearing the arguments of Mr' K.} Venumadhav, Advocate for the^{Petitioner and Mr. JithenderRao Veeramalla,} Additional Public Prosecutor on^{behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None Appeared} for the Respondent No.2.

¶20

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶21

IN THE TIIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OT TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶22

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICT] J.SREI]NIVAS RAO

¶23

CRIMINAL PETITION No.14369 of2026

¶24

CN R N o.HBH C010602932026

Date: 08.09.2026.

Between:

Konda Laxman

Petitioner

AND

'[he State of 1 elangana, and another

¶31

...Respondents

¶32

ORDER

¶33

1n petitioner/accused No.2 seeking to quash the ltroceedings C.C .No.18l-5 of 2025. on the file of learned Principal Junior Civil

¶34

Judge -cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Jagtial.

¶35

Heard Mr.K.,enumadhav, learned counsel fo: the petitioner and ,Vr.Jithender Itao Veeramalla, learned Additional public

¶36

Prosecutor tbr respondent No.l

¶37

3 Thc spccr frc allesation against the petitioneri accused No.2 is that 6e has procurerl I)DS rice from the beneficiaries at cheaper rate

¶38

¶39

to sell the same^{for proht and on 23.06.2025, the petitionerwas}

¶40

found in possession of 182.20^{quintalsof PDS rice.}

¶41

Leamed counsel for the^{petitionerwould submit that without} there being aly complaint^{from any beneficiary, alleging that the} rice was^{procured deceptively or with a criminal intent and} charging the^{petitioner for 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'No'5'709of} 2019, while considering^{the same situation, categoricallyobserved} that the offences alleged^{against the petitioners therein could not be} continued and accordingly^{quashedthe proceedings' The petitioner} is also entitled^{to the same reliefand henceprayed to quash the} proceedings against the^{peti tioner.}

¶42

The leamed Additional^{PublicProsecutor submits thatas per} prosecution, the offences^{said to have been committed by the} petitioner is cheating and^{violation of Section7 of the Essential} Commodities Act,^{1955(for short 'EC Act') and requested to pass} appropriate orders.

¶43

Section 7 of the^{EC Act contemplate that any person} contravenes^{with the production, supply,distributionand trade of}

¶44

¶45

essential commodities, is punishable. As per the prosecution, the petitioner has procured PDS rice from the bcneficiaries after

¶46

supply from the dealer

¶47

7 A^(loordinate Bench of this Cou( in Crl.P.No.7227 of 2025

¶48

has consiclered the idcntical facts and observed thal:

¶49

"Therc is no uverment indiceling that the petitioner in any wuy clcceptivcll itdutecl the beneficiaries to port with the supplied PDS rice or tht beneJiciun entn6te(l the PDS rice purchased by rhem with the pctitioner and they dishoncstly misappropriated or conyerted to their otrn lsc ot.used it itt ti.,lqtion ofe lawful direction or cotiract. In the uhsence of es:entlal factctrs, on the face of prosecution, thts Court finds it to bc a fit cuse ro t'xercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. Thus .ontinuuncL,o/ pntceedings^qgainst the petitioner is abuse o/ process o.f lat .

¶50

-fhe facts and circumstances of the present case also similar

¶51

to those in the above case and hence, this Court finds it to be a fit case to exercise^jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS bv applying the same analogy and to quash the procr:edings against the petitioner herein

¶52

Accordinglv, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings ur C.C.No.1815 of 2025, on the fi1e of learned Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Jagt ial, against the petitioner'accused No.2, are hereby quashed

¶53

¶54

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

¶55

closed.

¶56

SD/-^MOHD.ISMAIL DEPUW^REGIST

¶57

/TTRUE^COPY//

¶58

CTION OFFICER

¶59

To, 21 The The PrinciPal Station^{House Officer, Jagtial JuniorCivil Judge-cum-Judicial RuralPolice Station,First Cl} agtial Magistrate District.^{at Jagtial,} 34 One Two CC CCs^to to^{Mr' Public K. Venumadhav,Prosecuto} r^Advocate High Court^{[OPUC]for the St} ate of^Telangana,at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶60