THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION No.4552 OF 2021

O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 7 in C.C.No.1358 of 2020 on the file of the learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Suryapet (for short, “the trial Court”) for the offences under Sections 420 of I.P.C. and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 06.06.2020 at 6:00 hours, on reliable information, respondent No.2 along with his force rushed to PSR Centre, Suryapet town, there they found an auto bearing No.AP-24-TV-1363 with two persons and 10 bags of PDS rice which containing each bag 50 Kgs, total 5 quintals. On enquiry, it is found that the person by name Dharavath Linga is running rice business in his house. He used to purchase the PDS rice from surrounding areas at cheaper rate of Rs.8/- per kg and sold it to Damera Narsimha, Rachakonda Ganesh, Kakkireni Prabhakar and Allani Srinivas at the rate of Rs.10/- per kg. Damera Narasimha confessed that he, Rachakonda Ganesh, Kakkireni Prabhakar and Allani Srinivas are doing paddy business by taking a room on rent. They used to purchase PDS rice at the cheaper rate and selling it to the needy customers at a higher rate for gaining wrongfully. Respondent No.2 along with his staff raided the shop of Damera Narasimha with the said mediators and they conducted confession panchanama of Damnera Narsimha, Rachakonda Ganesh, Kakkireni Prabhakar and Allani Srinivas and seized 13 bags of PFS rice, total 6 ½ quintals. Basing on their confession they conducted ride on Nagarjuna Parboilled Mill, Pillamarri village outskirts, Suryapet town and they found two persons by name Kottu Anjaneyulu and Morishetti Ramesh and seized 53 bags of PDS rice, total 38 ½ quintals. Respondent No.2 registered a suo moto case in Crime No.280 of 2020 for the offences under Section 420 of I.P.C. and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The police after conducting the investigation has filed charge sheet before the trial Court.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 7 and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent -State. Perused the record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that the Government of India issued G.O.Ms.No.20 Consumers Affairs Food and Civil Supplies (CS.1) Department dated 21.11.2014 stating that rice and paddy do not come under the purview of the essential commodities from 30.11.2014. He would further submit that the Central Government had issued the Circular deleting the levy control on rice from 30.09.2015. But the respondents are harassing the petitioners stating that the rice possessed by them is PDS.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that there are no direct witnesses to show that the petitioners purchased PDS rice from card holders and sold it to customers. He would further submit that there are no witnesses to show that the subject rice is purchased from ration shop dealers or card holders and therefore, continuation of impugned proceedings against petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of law. Hence, learned counsel, relying upon the decisions passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Manipur Administration Vs. M. Nila Chandra Singh, AIR 1964 Supreme Court 1533, Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Limited Vs. Prem Heavy Engineering Works (P) Limited and another, AIR 1997 Supreme Court 2477 Shyam Sunder Bhartia Vs. State of Punjab and Others, AIR Online 2018 SC 756 S.Samuel, M.D., Harrisons Malayalam and another Vs. Union

of India and others4, M/s. Ipour GKC & RKC & sons and another Vs. State represented by Station House Officer, Pondicherry and others5, the decision passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, at Amaravathi in A.Padmanabha Reddy and others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by the Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh and another, the decision passed by this Court in Gu