Allowed

Elindra Masthan Ravikumar at Ravi Kumar, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC12 Mar 2024CRLP/1437/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings against Accused No.2, whose sole alleged role was selling jaggery in his ordinary kirana business to Accused No.1. Holding the merchant cannot be liable without knowledge or involvement in illicit liquor manufacture, the court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No.295 of 2023 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kavali, SPSR Nellore District were quashed.

Elindra Masthan Ravikumar at Ravi Kumar, Vs The… — Quashing and FIR | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶2

Criminal Petition No.1437 of 2024

¶3

Order:

¶4

This Criminal Petition is filed by the

¶5

petitioner/Accused No.2 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.295 of 2023 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kavali, SPSR Nellore District.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Public Prosecutor.

¶7

The only allegation against the petitioner is that he sold jaggery to the accused No.1, which is likely to be used by the accused No.1 for manufacture of illicit liquor.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this matter is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in Crl.P.Nos.406 of 2021 and batch, dated 29.1.2021 and this Court has earlier quashed the charge sheets and F.I.Rs registered in similar facts and allegations. Therefore, he would submit that the petitioner,

¶9

¶10

who is similarly placed, is also entitled for quash of the criminal proceedings launched against him.

¶11

Learned Public Prosecutor would fairly concede

¶12

that the only allegation against this petitioner is that he sold jaggery and that this Court earlier quashed criminal proceedings launched against some of the accused based on similar facts and allegations. Therefore, he prays to pass appropriate orders in this petition also accordingly.

¶13

It is not disputed before this Court that the petitioner is a merchant doing kirana business. Therefore, when he only sold the jaggery in the process of his business which is purchased by the customers, he cannot be held liable for any offence punishable under Sections 7A r/w 8(e) of the A.P. Prohibition Act, 1995. It is not the case of the prosecution that he is involved in manufacture of illicit liquor. Case of the prosecution is that the accused No.1 indulged in commission of the said offence of manufacture of illicit liquor and for the said purpose of manufacturing illicit liquor, he purchased jaggery from the petitioner/A2. So, when the petitioner only sold jaggery in the process of his business without knowing that the same

¶14

¶15

will be used for manufacture of illicit liquor, he cannot be held liable for prosecution under Sections 7A r/w 8(e) of the A.P. Prohibition Act, 1995. Therefore, the very launching of criminal prosecution against this petitioner in the above case certainly amounts to abuse of process of law and the said criminal proceedings initiated against him are liable to be quashed.

¶16

In the result, in view of the above discussion, this Criminal Petition is allowed and proceedings in C.C.No.295 of 2023 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kavali, SPSR Nellore District are hereby quashed.

¶17

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

¶18

____________________________ K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J

Dated: 13.3.2024 GR

186

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶23