THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRIMINAL PETITION No.11397 OF 2010 DATED:30-11-2010 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing further proceedings in F.I.R.No.181 of 2010 of Kothapet police station, East Godavri District. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents- State. Perused the records. 3. The 2nd respondent-Tahsisldar, Kothapeta sent a report to the Station House Officer, Kothapeta police station, stating as follows: “By possessing illegally and by mortgaging the household supply cards the dealer has contravened Clause 22 (ii) of the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008. For the above contravention, the officials have booked a 6-A case under Essential Commodities Act, 1955. As per the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 Section 7 (1) (a) (i) in the case of an order made with reference to clause –(h) or clause (i) of sub- Section 2 of that Section, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and shall also be liable to fine. In view of the above facts, I request you to book a criminal case under Section 420 IPC read with 7 A (1) (a) (i) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 against Smt.Abburi Venkata Raghavamma, dealer of F.P.Shop No.12, Kothapeta village and mandal and also against the above seven cardholders, who have illegally mortgaged the Government document i.e. ration card which is involved huge Government subsidy”. 4. Based on the above report, police registered F.I.R.No.181 of 2010 under Section 420 IPC and Section 7 (1) (a) (i) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Specific allegation in the report is that the petitioner violated the conditions under the A.P.State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008. It is not disclosed in the First Information Report as to how the ingredients of Section 420 IPC are attracted. It is not disputed that the similar First Information Report, registered against the other dealer of the fair price shop in the village for the offence under Section 420 IPC, was quashed by this Court. A copy of the order, dated 22-10-2010, in Crl.P.No.10372 of 2010 is also placed on record by the learned counsel for the petitioner, wherein the proceedings in F.I.R.No.158 of 2010 against the other fair price shop dealer, similarly situated, was quashed on the ground that the allegation is vague and the same does not constitute any offence under Section 420 IPC. The case of the petitioner herein also stands on the same footing. 5. In the circumstances, in view of the orders passed earlier by this Court and having regard to the fact that the offence alleged does not attract the ingredients of Section 420 IPC, further proceedings in F.I.R.No.181 of 2010 are held unsustainable insofar as the offence under Section 420 IPC is concerned. The state is however at liberty to take necessary action against the petitioner under relevant provisions, including the Control Order, 2008, which is alleged to have been violated. 6. In the result, Criminal Petition is disposed of. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 30th November, 2010 Tsy