Proceedings quashed due to lack of requisite ingredients for alleged offences under applicable statutes.

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’) by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 4 to quash the proceedings against them in FIR No.371 of 2024 of P.S. Malakpet, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha , 2023 (for short ‘BNS’)(previously Section 420 of IPC) and Section 20 (2) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act (for short ‘COTP Act’).

2. Heard Sri Y.Bala Murali, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent.

3. Basing on the complaint dated 05.10.2024 that the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 were storing and distributing the banned foreign cigarettes in the godown of petitioner/accused No.3, which were supplied by petitioner/accused No.4, a case in Crime No.371 of 2024 was registered against them for the aforesaid offences.

4. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and they are in no way concerned with the offences alleged. The ingredients of the offences alleged are not at all attracted against the petitioners. He further submits that in similar circumstances, this Court has quashed the proceedings against the petitioners therein in number of cases. Hence, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor fairly submits that in similar circumstances, this Court has quashed the proceedings against the petitioners therein in number of cases.

6. For the sake of convenience, Section 420 of IPC and Section 20 (2) of the COTP Act are extracted hereunder:

“420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.—

Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

20(2) Any person who sells or distributes cigarettes or tobacco products which do not contain either on the package or on their label, the specified warning and the nicotine and tar contents shall in the case of first conviction be punishable with imprisonment for a term, which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both, and, for the second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to three thousand rupees.”

7. It is not the case of the prosecution that the person so deceived was induced to deliver any property or to do any other acts falling within the ambit of Section 318(4) of BNS (previously 420 of IPC). Since the contents of the complaint do not attract the ingredients of offence under Section 318(4) of BNS (previously 420 of IPC), the proceedings against the petitioners for the said offence are liable to be quashed.

8. Section 20 of COTP Act deals with punishment for failure to give specified warning and nicotine and tar contents. In the complaint, since there is no allegation that the seized products do not contain the labels as well as statutory warning, the offence under Section 20(2) of the COTP Act is not made out against the petitioners and the same is also liable to be quashed.

9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the continuation of the