APHC010040692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.912 of 2025 Between: Sahu Pradeep @ Sahu Pratap ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. HABIBULLA SHAIK Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 VS,J Crl.P.No.912 of 2025 ORDER : This petition, under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (Section 482 of Cr.P.C.), is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 in C.C.No.4375 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judicial First Class Magistrate for Prohibition & Excise, Guntur, seeking to quash the proceedings against him in the said case. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. 3. Brief facts of the case are as follows: (i) On 12.09.2019 at about 4.00 p.m., on receipt of credible information about sale and purchase of prohibited gutka and khaini products, the S.I. of Police, Pattabhipuram Police Station, along with his staff, proceeded to Syamala Nagar Railway Gate, Guntur Town, and apprehended accused Nos.1 to 4, who were found in possession of prohibited tobacco and khaini products. On interrogation, accused Nos.1 to 4 confessed to have engaged in the business of prohibited tobacco products by purchasing them from accused No.5, and pursuant to their confession, the prohibited tobacco products, which were in their possession, were seized and accused Nos.1 to 4 were arrested, followed by registration of a case in Crime No.305 of 2019 against them on the file of Pattabhipuram Police Station, for the offences under Sections 420, 272, 273, 188 & 328 I.P.C. and 3 VS,J Crl.P.No.912 of 2025 Sections 58, 59 & 63 of Food Standard Safety Act, 2006 (for short, ‘the FSS Act’). (ii) While the matter was at the stage of investigation, accused Nos.3 to 5 filed criminal petitions, vide Crl.P.Nos.5750 of 2019, 5629 of 2019 and 249 of 2020, before this Court, seeking to quash the proceedings against them and the said criminal petitions were allowed. (iii) Thereupon, the investigation continued against the remaining accused and after completion of investigation, the police filed charge sheet on the file of the learned Special Judicial First Class Magistrate for Prohibition & Excise, Guntur, for the offences under Sections 420, 272, 188 & 328 I.P.C. and Sections 58, 59 & 63 of FSS Act, and the same was taken on file vide C.C.No.4375 of 2022. (iv) Seeking quashment of the proceedings against him in the said C.C., the petitioner herein/accused No.1 approached this Court by way of this criminal petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that accused No.2 in the present C.C. has also filed a criminal petition vide Crl.P.No.6142 of 2019, seeking to quash the proceedings against him and this Court, having considered the matter in detail, has allowed the said criminal petition along with other similar criminal petitions, vide 4 VS,J Crl.P.No.912 of 2025 common order dated 18.12.2019, holding that none of the offences alleged would attract. In view of the same, learned counsel submits that the petitioner herein, being a co-accused and facing trial for the very same offences, is entitled for the same relief and, therefore, prays to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor would also confirm that the proceedings against the other accused, including accused No.2 in the subject C.C., were already quashed by this Court. 6. This Court has perused the entire material available on record. Perusal of the record reveals that the proceedings against all other accused in the subject C.C. have been quashed by this Court on their filing independent criminal petitions. It is seen that in the criminal petition filed by accused No.2 i.e., Crl.P.No.6142 of 2019, which was decided along with other similar criminal petitions, this Court has extensively considered the applicability of the FSS Act to tobacco products as well as the definition of ‘food’. Having considered so, it was held by this Court that tobacco products are not defined as ‘food’ under the FSS Act. It was also held that it is only the Food Safety Officer, who is competent to launch a prosecution for the offences under the FSS Act and the Inspector of Police or Sub-Inspector of Police have no authority to investigate or to file a charge sheet. 5 VS,J Crl.P.No.912 of 2025 7. Relevant portion of the common order dated 18.12.2019 passed in the said Crl.P.No.6142 of 2019 & batch, which deals with the offences under Sections 58, 59 & 63 of FSS Act, is usefully extracted hereunder: “Cigarettes, Chewing tobacco, Pan Masala, Chewing material with tobacco are included in the tobacco products. Therefore, a prima facie reading of these Central enactments makes it clear that tobacco products are only defined under the COTPA Act and not under the FSS Act. The FSS Act, only talks of „food‟, which is intended for human consumption, which includes in it alcoholic drink, but does not include any narcotic or psychotropic substance. …Section 58 of the FSS Act, is a general provision, which provides penalty for contraventions for which no other penalty is provided. Section 59 of the FSS Act, deals with the penalty for any person who manufactures or sale, store, and distributes any article of „unsafe food‟ for human consumption. Section 63 of the FSS Act, deals with the punishment for a person or food business operator, who manufactures, stores any article of „food‟ without licence. Therefore, it is clear from a reading of the sections, which are being pressed into service by the prosecution time and again under the FSS Act, that all of them relate to „food‟ and „food articles‟ only. The Sections, which have been pressed into service, in the opinion of this Court, do not apply to an article which is not meeting the definition of food.” 8. So far as the offences under the Indian Penal Code i.e., Sections 420, 272, 188 & 328 I.P.C. are concerned, this Court, 6 VS,J Crl.P.No.912 of 2025 having considered the allegations levelled and the ingredients of the said provisions, held that none of those offences would attract in the present case. 9. It is pertinent to note that in the said common order dated 18.12.2019, this Court has also referred to an earlier order passed in Crl.P.No.3731 of 2018 & batch, wherein a detailed analysis of the similar issues has been carried out, and concluded that none of the Sections of the IPC or the FSS Act, which were pressed into service, are applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case on hand. Having concluded thus, this Court allowed the criminal petition filed by accused No.2 along with batch of other similar criminal petitions. 10. The above categorical findings rendered by this Court while adjudicating the criminal petition filed by the co-accused in the same crime, would squarely apply to the case of the petitioner herein/ accused No.1. Since this Court, after considering the matter in detail, has categorically held that none of the offences would be applicable, continuing the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.1 for the same offences would amount to abuse of process of law and thus, the proceedings against him are also liable to be quashed. 11. Accordingly, this criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.1 in C.C.No.4375 of 7 VS,J Crl.P.No.912 of 2025 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judicial First Class Magistrate for Prohibition & Excise, Guntur, are hereby quashed. 12. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in this criminal petition, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V. SUJATHA Date: 31.01.2025 IBL 8 VS,J Crl.P.No.912 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 912 of 2025 Dt: 31.01.2025 IBL