APHC010234692022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3784/2022 Between: 1. SYED SAIDA, S/O RAHAMTULLAH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, CASTE BY MUSLIM, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. DODLERU VILLAGE, KROSURU MANDAL, UNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED A N D 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI. 2. M DASU, , HEAD CONSTABLE, HC 3742, KROSURU POLICE STATION, KROSURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to call for the records in Cr.No.181 of 2021 the file of the Krosuru Police Statition, Krosuru Mandal, Guntur District and ash the same and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with the filing of certified copy of in Cr.No.181 of 2021 the file of the Krosuru Police Statition, Krosuru Mandal, Guntur District SRK, J Crl.P.No.3784 of 2022 2 IA NO: 2 OF 2022 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in Cr.No. 181 of 2021 on the file of the Krosuru Police Statition, Krosuru Mandal, Guntur District pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition and Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. HARISH KUMAR.T Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. HARISH KUMAR.T Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: SRK, J Crl.P.No.3784 of 2022 3 O R D E R This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity 8CrPC9) has been filed on behalf of the petitioners/accused, to quash the proceedings in Crime No.181 of 2021 of Krosuru Police Station, Krosuru of Guntur District registered against the petitioner/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 188, 420, 272, 273 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity 8IPC9) and Section 20 (1) read with 7 (1) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (for brevity 8the COTPA, 20039). 2. It is the case against the petitioner/accused that on 26.10.2021 at about 7.00 a.m. the petitioner/accused was caught hold by the police and in the presence of mediators, police seized the tobacco products i.e. Blue Bull Tobacco-795 pouches, Rani Gutkha- 660 pouches, VI Tobacco-330 pouches sachets, totaling 1,785 pouches worth of Rs.30,000/- and got registered a case in Crime No.181 of 2021 of Krosuru Police Station, Krosuru of Guntur for the offences punishable under Sections 188, 420, 272, 273 read with 34 of the IPC and Section 20 (1) read with 7 (1) of the COTPA, 2003. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner/accused that the SRK, J Crl.P.No.3784 of 2022 4 respondents/police have no power to register the case under the COTPA Act, 2003. Hence, the Criminal Petition. 3. When the matter came up for hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and, acceded to, by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor that the subject matter of this Criminal Petition is squarely covered by the Common Order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.2966 of 2021 and batch, dated 27.08.2018, wherein this Court held thus: <Therefore, in view of the law declared in various judgments referred supra, chewing tobacco and khaini are not the food within the definition of Section 3 (j) of the Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006 and the manufacture, sale or exposing for sale of tobacco etc., I governed by the provisions of COTP Act, but not by FSS Act and so also the provisions of IPC. …In Criminal Petition Nos.3765, 3766 and 6755 of 2018 (sl.Nos.3, 4 and 13) Police registered case for the offence punishable under Section 7 (1) (2) (3) (5) and Section 26 of COTP Act, wherein the accused were found manufacturing Pan Masala. But Pan Masala is not a tobacco product to fall within the purview of COTP Act. Therefore, the provisions of COTP Act have no application, thereby registration of crime for violation of Sections 7 (1) (2) (3) (5) and Section 26 of COTP Act is an illegality.= 4. In view of the Common Order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.3731 of 2018 and batch, dated 27.08.2018 and for the reasons mentioned therein, the Criminal Petition is allowed, and SRK, J Crl.P.No.3784 of 2022 5 the proceedings in Crime No.181 of 2021 of Krosuru Police Station, Krosuru of Guntur District registered against the petitioner/accused are quashed. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition, shall stand closed. ___ __________ JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY 9th April, 2026. Note: Office to attach copy of Common Order in Criminal Petition No.3731 of 2018 and batch, dated 27.08.2018, to this order. B/o. DNB