IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the High Court's power to quash FIRs that do not disclose a cognizable offence, preventing abuse of legal process.

ORDER :

1. This writ petition is filed declaring the action of the respondents No. 3 and 4 in registering FIR No. 158 of 2016 and showing the petitioner as Accused No. 3 as illegal and arbitrary.

2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner herein is the proprietor of Vigneshwara Traders and running rice mill and he is having requisite licenses to run this rice mill. One company by name Raja & Co. from Palagath, Kerala approached the petitioner through some commission agent and requested to supply 210 quintals of rice. Accordingly they raised a way bill from the commercial tax department and on 15.11.2016 at 5.10 p.m. Further they also obtained the requisite permit from the Agricultural Market Committee, Sattenapalli on the same day. Accordingly, the petitioner supplied 280 bags of rice each containing 75 kgs totaling to 210 quintals worth of Rs. 4,39,110/- inclusive of VAT. Thereafter, the lorry bearing No. TN 34 V 4312 moved from rice mill at 5.30 p.m. on 15.11.2016 to Palagath, Kerala and when the lorry travelled 9 KMs from rice mill to Palagath, Kerala, the Sub Inspector of Police, Sattenapalli Rural police station has stopped the vehicle and seized the same with load and registered a case in Crime No. 158 of 2016 under Section 420 IPC and Section 7(1) of E.C. Act, 1955. Question the said action, the present writ petition came to be filed.

3. This Court vide order dated 2.12.2016 has granted interim direction to the police concerned not to arrest the petitioner.

4. Heard Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents.

5. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents No. 3 and 4 have falsely implicated the petitioner and arrested him illegally as there is no illegal transportation of rice. The petitioner has all sorts of bills and documents, Online Way bill, permit, tax, Invoice which shows that the 210 quintals of rice is a pure non-Government rice. Therefore it cannot be said that the same is PDS rice. But however with a view to harass the petitioner in all the ways the respondent No. 4 registered the FIR and high handedly seized the rice. He further submits that earlier also the respondent No. 4 registered false cases against the petitioner alleging that the petitioner transporting PDS rice. In all the cases Joint Collector and Curt have exonerated the petitioner stating the subject rice are not PDS rice. To this effect, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed I.A. No. 1 of 2016 (WPMP No. 53149 of 2016) seeking to receive the order copies passed by the Joint Collector and Additional District Magistrate, Guntur passed in EC No. 444/2014-S7 dated 24.07.2015 and order in EC No. 970/2014-S7 dated 24.07.2015 and orders passed by the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli in CC No. 130 of 2014 dated 15.09.2015 and orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Piduguralla in CC No. 50 of 2014 dated 05.01.2016 as material papers.

6. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader denying all the allegations made in the petition. On instructions received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Sattenapalli Rural P.S. he would submit that, the above case was registered against the petitioner (A.3) in accordance with law, since he has cheated the Government and the PDS Rice consumers by transporting the PDS rice illegally and contrary to the provisions of EC Act through his agents i.e., the drivers of the lorry have clearly stated the involvement of the petitioner in the above said offence. Therefore, there is no irregularity or illegality in registering the Crime No. 158 of 2016 against the petitioner herein as Accused No. 3. Further, during the course of investigation the samples of PDS Rice seized rice are sent for chemical analysis and report and the said report is awaited. Therefore the contention of the petitioner that he has been illegally implicated in the crime is not true an