APHC010098582026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1528/2026 Between: 1. BANDARU SRINIVASA RAO, S/O GURUMURTHY,AGE 39 YEARS, OCC MANAGING PARTNER OFM/S.LAKSHMI GANAPATHI MODERN RICE MILL,LAGISETTIPALEM V, SUBBAVARAM M,VISAKHAPATNAM DIST. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep. by its Public ProsecutorHigh Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravahi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. M M M SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.,’)/Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) seeking to quash the proceedings against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 in C.C.No.971 of 2 2023 on the file of the learned XII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Anakapalli, Anakapalli District registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for brevity, ‘the E.C. Act’). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. On perusal of the record, the District Supply Office (Rural), Visakhapatnam, submitted a report under Section 6A of ‘the E.C. Act’ before the learned Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam. After following the procedure contemplated under Section 6B of ‘the E.C. Act’, the learned Joint Collector ordered confiscation of the seized stock to the Government. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the Petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam. The learned Sessions Judge, after hearing both sides, set aside the confiscation order passed by the learned Joint Collector. 5. Meanwhile, the District Supply Office (Rural), Visakhapatnam, lodged a complaint, which was registered as Crime No.33 of 2022 of Sabbavaram Police Station for the alleged offence punishable under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of ‘the E.C. Act.’ 6. This Court, in Crl.P.No.1928 of 2022 dated 14.10.2024, in similar facts and circumstances, quashed the criminal proceedings. Likewise, in Crl.P.No.1625 of 2022 dated 18.12.2024, this Court quashed the proceedings in C.C.No.525 of 2021 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate of First 3 Class, Darsi, holding that once the proceedings under Section 6A of ‘the E.C. Act’ were set aside by the learned Sessions Judge, continuation of the criminal prosecution under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of ‘the E.C. Act’ would amount to abuse of process of law. 7. In the present case also, since the confiscation proceedings under Section 6A of ‘the E.C. Act’ have been set aside by the learned Sessions Judge, continuation of the criminal proceedings against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 would amount to abuse of process of law and no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further. 8. Accordingly, the proceedings in C.C.No.971 of 2023 on the file of the learned XII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Anakapalli, Anakapalli District, against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 are hereby set aside. 9. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 02.03.2026 PRA 4 74 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1528 of 2026 Date: 02.03.2026 PRA