Goapla Krishna Parigadupu & Ors. vs The State Of Telangana & Anr.

This Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by the petitioners, who were arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 5, seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.62 of 2026, of Chandrugonda Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'the BNS') and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'the E.C. Act').

Heard Mr. B.Dileep Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. V.Jithendar Rao, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in the present crime. Even according to the allegations levelled in the complaint, the ingredients of the offences under 318(4) of the BBNS and Section 7 of the E.C. Act are not attracted. He further submitted that in the similar circumstances, this Court in Criminal Petition No.842 of 2026 quashed the proceedings against the petitioners therein on 28.01.2026 and the petitioners are also entitled for the very same relief. Hence, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners is a clear abuse of the process of law.

Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to seek the relief, which was granted in Crl.P.No.842 of 2026, on the ground that the petitioners herein have purchased the rice from the fair price shop dealer, whereas in the order dated 28.01.2026 passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.842 of 2026, the petitioners therein had purchased the PDS rice from the card holders. However, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor fairly submitted that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment below seven years and the Investigating Officer wants to follow the due procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar^{11.(2014) 8 SCC 273}.

Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that there are specific allegations levelled in the complaint that the petitioners had purchased the rice from the fair price shop dealer. Whether the allegations levelled against the petitioners are true or not, the same will be revealed during the course of investigation. The offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the Investigating Officer wants to follow the due procedure as contemplated under Section 35(4) of the BNSS. In view of the same, the petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 31.08.2026 and on such appearance, the Investigating Officer is directed to scrupulously follow the due procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). The petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation. It is needless to mention that the petitioners are entitled to put forth their grievance before the Investigating Officer by raising all the pleas available to them and they are also entitled to submit the documents, which are in their custody.

With the above directions, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.