ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.”), seeking quashment of the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C. No. 4507 of 2021, pending on the file of the learned XXV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at Rajendranagar.

2. The petitioner is accused No.1 arraigned for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (E.C. Act, 1955).

3. I have heard Mr. K. Satish Chakravarthy, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. M. Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, representing respondent No.1-State.

4.1. The brief facts of the case are that on 23.06.2021 at about 7:50 PM, acting upon credible information regarding the illegal transportation of Public Distribution System (PDS) rice, the complainant, along with his staff, conducted a surprise inspection near Pillar No. 274. During the course of inspection, a lorry bearing Registration No. KA 56 1924 was intercepted, which was found to be carrying plastic bags containing PDS rice. Thereafter, in the presence of two mediators, approximately 20 tons of PDS rice, along with the vehicle, was seized. Accused Nos. 2 to 4 were apprehended and produced before the Station House Officer, Rajendranagar. Based on the report submitted, a case in Crime No. 1171 of 2021 was registered for offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Upon completion of investigation, a charge sheet came to be filed.

4.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegation against the petitioner (Accused No.1) is solely that accused Nos. 2 to 4 were transporting PDS rice at his instance, allegedly procured from beneficiaries. It is further submitted that accused Nos. 2 to 4 had earlier approached this Court in Criminal Petition No. 5684 of 2026 seeking quashment of proceedings, and by order dated 16.04.2026, the said proceedings were quashed.

4.3. It is further argued that the implication of the present petitioner is based solely on the alleged confessional statements of co-accused recorded by the police, and no independent or corroborative material has been collected during investigation to establish his involvement. The charge sheet, therefore, fails to disclose any prima facie case. However, as the petitioner was neither present at the scene of offence nor was any contraband seized from his possession. Thus, there is no material linking him to any such contravention and prayed for quashing of the proceedings.

5. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor fairly submits that the prosecution case against the petitioner is based solely on the confessional statements of co-accused and that no independent evidence has been gathered. It is also conceded that proceedings against accused Nos. 2 to 4 have already been quashed by this Court.

6. I have perused the material on record.

7. At the outset, in order to attract an offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, the prosecution is required to establish the essential ingredients of “cheating,” namely: (i) deception of a person; (ii) fraudulent or dishonest inducement; and (iii) delivery of property pursuant to such inducement. These elements must co-exist and be supported by prima facie material on record.

8. With regard to Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, it is incumbent upon the prosecution to demonstrate a clear contravention of any order issued under Section 3 of the said Act, which regulates the production, supply, distribution, and trade of essential commodities.

9. In the instant case, the prosecution alleges that accused Nos. 2 to 4, acting under the instructions of the petitioner, procured PDS rice from beneficiaries at a lower price with the intention of selling the same at a higher price in the State of Karnataka. However, th