Allowed

G Bahunprakash v. State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC20 Mar 2024CRLP/152/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashment of six C.C.s for offences under Sections 171H and 188 IPC. Following an earlier coordinate-bench order, the Court held cognizance under Section 188 IPC on a police charge sheet was barred by Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C., and Section 171H being non-cognizable barred police investigation under Section 155. Proceedings quashed.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings against petitioner in C.C.Nos.93, 132, 131, 94, 144 and 128 of 2019 quashed; pending applications closed.

G Bahunprakash Vs State of Ap — Quashing and FIR | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAP

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 149.150.151.152.153 and 154 OF 2020

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 149 of 2020

¶7

Between:

¶8

G Bahnuprakash, S/o late G. Muddukrishnama Naidu, Aged about 39 years, R/o Venkataramapuram Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Tirupathi Urban, Chittoor District.

¶9

...Petitioner/Accused

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of AP, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Amaravathi.

¶12

... Respondent/Complainant

¶13

A. Prameela Rani, W/o Srinivasulu, Aged about 50 years, Occ.MPDO, Vakada, Nellore District.

¶14

...Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶15

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.93/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nagari I.A. NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all and further proceedings, including appearance of the Petitioner/Accused in C.C. No.93/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nagari, Pending disposal of the criminal petition.

¶16

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 150 OF 2020

¶17

Between:

¶18

G Bahnuprakash, S/o late G. Muddukrishnama Naidu, Aged about 39 years, R/o Venkataramapuram Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Tirupathi Urban, Chittoor District.

¶19

...Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶20

¶21

State of AP, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High^CourtofA.Pat Amaravathi

¶22

...Respondent/Complainant

¶23

P. Surendranath, S/o Venkatarathnam, Aged about 36 years, Occ.. MPDO, Vijayapuram Mandal, Chittoor District.

¶24

...Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶25

¶26

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2020

¶27

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all and further proceedings, including appearance of the Petitioner/Accused No.2 in C.C. No. 132/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nagari, Pending disposal of the criminal petition

¶28

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 151 OF 2020

¶29

Between:

¶30

G Bahnuprakash, S/o late G. Muddukrishnama Naidu, Aged about 39 years, R/o Venkataramapuram Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Tirupathi Urban, Chittoor District. ...Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶31

AND

¶32

The State of AP, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Amaravathi

¶33

... Respondent/Complainant

¶34

¶35

P. Surendranath, S/o Venkatarathnam, Aged about^{36years,Occ..} MPDO, Vijayapuram Mandal, Chittoor District.

¶36

...Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶37

that in the Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of^{CriminalPetition,} the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in No.131/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate,^Nagari.

¶38

I A. NO: 2 OF 2020

¶39

that in the Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying ’ circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of the High Court may be pleased to stay all and further^{P'^oeeedmgs,inclu} g appearance of the Petitioner/Accused No.2 in C.C. ^0.131/2019 on the of Judiciai First Ciass Magistrate, Nagari, Pending^{disposaiofthecnminai} petition.

¶40

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 152 OF 2020

¶41

Between: ^ u. * on G Bahnuprakash, S/o late G. Muddukrishnama Naidu, Aged about 39 yearf R/o vinkataramapuram Viiiage, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Tirupathi Urban, Chittoor District.

¶42

...Petitioner/Accused

¶43

AND

¶44

The State of AP, rep. by the Public Prosecutor,^HighCourtof Amaravathi

¶45

...Respondent/Complainant

¶46

rxK Chandra Sekhar, S/o K. Kannaiah, Aged about 58 years Occ. MPDO, R/o D.No.1-7-2, West Street, Naidupet, Nellore District.

¶47

...Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶48

that in the Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C prayng ^ circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Pet'^on, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in No.94/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate,^Nagari.

¶49

LA. NO: 1 OF 2020

¶50

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of^{CriminalPetition} the High Court may be pleased to stay all and further^{proceedings,including}

¶51

appearance of the Petitioner/Accused in C.C. No.94/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nagari, Pending disposal of the criminal petition.

¶52

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 153 OF 2020

¶53

Between:

¶54

G. Bahnuprakash, S/o late G. Muddukrishnama Naidu,^Agedabout39 years, R/o Venkataramapuram Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Tirupathi Urban, Chittoor District

¶55

...Petitioner/Accused

¶56

AND

¶57

The State of AP, rep. by the Public prosecutor High^CourtAP, Amaravathi

¶58

...Respondent/ Complainant

¶59

S. Rama Sundhar Reddy, S/o S. Jayarami Reddy, Aged^about45 years, Occ TUDA Secretary, 170-Nagari AC, Chittoor^District.

¶60

...Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶61

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.144/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nagari I.A. NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all and further proceedings, including appearance of the Petitioner/Accused in C.C. No. 144/2019^onthe file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nagari, Pending disposal of the criminal petition.

¶62

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 154 OF 2020

¶63

Between:

¶64

G. Bahnuprakash, S/o late G. Muddukrishnama Naidu, Aged about 39 years, R/o Venkataramapuram Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Tirupathi Urban, Chittoor District.

¶65

...Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶66

¶67

1. The State of A.P., rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Amaravathi.

¶68

... Respondent/ Complainant

¶69

¶70

2 P Surendranath, S/o Venkatarathnam, Aged about 36^years,Occ. MPDO, Vijayapuram Mandal, Chittoor District

¶71

...Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶72

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of^{CriminalPetition,} the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings,^includingthe appearance of the Petitioner/Accused No.2 in C.C. No.128/2019^onthefile of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nagari, Pending^{disposalofthecriminal} petition

¶73

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2020

¶74

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of^{CriminalPetition,} the High Court may be pleased to stay all and further^{proceedings,inC.C.} No.128/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate,^Nagari, Pending disposal of the criminal petition These Petitions coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitions and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Masthan Naidu Cherukuri, Advocate^{forthePetitionerin} all the above petitions and Ms.D.Prasanna Lakshmi, Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 in all^{theabovepetitions} and none appeared for the Respondent No.2

¶75

The Court made the following:

¶76

HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶77

Criminal Petition Nos.149. 150, 151, 152, 153 and 154^of2020

¶78

COMMON ORDER:

¶79

The instant petitions under Section 482 of the Code^ofCriminal Procedure, 1973 (in short “Cr.P.C.”) have been filed,^{bythePetitioner,} seeking quashment of the proceedings against him in^C;C.Nos.93, 132, 131, 94, 144 and 128 of 2019 respectively on the file^oftheCourtof Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nagari.

¶80

Heard Sri Mastan Naidu Cherukuri, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Ms.D.Prasanna' Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State/Respondent No.l. Though notice was sent. none appeared on behalf of Respondent No.2. and 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner acceded to, by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor^{thatthesubject} matter of this Criminal Petition is squarely covered by the Order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.459 of 2020,^{dated09.11.2023,} wherein this Court held as follows.

¶81

It is apt to mention that there is a statutory bar^under Section 194 (1) (a) (1) Cr.P.C. to take cognizance^oftheoffence punishable under Section 188 of IPC basing on the charge^sheet. It is beneficial to extract Section 195 (1) (a) (1)^{of Cr.P.C.}

¶82

’Section 195(11 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure. 1973 (1) No Court shall take cognizance-

¶83

(a) (i) of any offence punishable under sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ), or >

¶84

afaeimenf o,f or attempt to commit, such offence, or

¶85

(Hi) of any criminal conspiracy to commit such offence, except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate;

¶86

(b) (i) of any offence punishable under any of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), namely, sections 193 to 196 (both inclusive) 199, 200, 205 to 211 (both inclusive) and 228, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in,i: or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court, or (ii) of any offence described in section 463, or punishable under section 471, section 475 or section 476, of the said Code, when such offence ISiz alleged to have been committed in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any Court, or

¶87

(iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit, or attempt to commit, or the abetment of any offence speciifed in sub- clause (i) or sub- clause (ii), except on the complaint in writing of that Court, or of some other Court to which that Court is subordiriate.”

¶88

In the light of the language employed in the legal provisions referred supra, it is vivid that there is a clear bar under Section 195 (1) (a) (1) of Cr.P.C. for taking cognizance of any offences punishable under Sections 172 to 188 of IPC, except on the. complaint, in writing, of the Public Servant concerned or of some other Public Servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. At this juncture, it is relevant to understand what is complaint as per the Criminal Procedure Code. Section 2 (d) of Cr.P.C. is hereby extracted for quick reference: (d) complaint means any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this Code, that some person, whether known or unknown, has committed an offence, but does not include a police report. Explanation.- A report made by a police officer in a case which discloses, after investigation. the commission of non-

¶89

¶90

cognizable offence shall be deemed to be a complaint;^andthe police ofifcer by whom such report is made shall he^deemedto be the complainant;”

¶91

Admittedly, in the present case, without there being a complaint by the authority concerned, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under^Section 188 of IPC basing on a charge sheet filed by the police,^whichis in utter violation of Section 195 1 (a) (1) of Cr.P.C. 13. In catena of decisions, a coordinate bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.4633 of 2023, CrlP.No.5323 of 2009, 3670 of 2013, 8597 of 2018 and 9236 of 2018 clearly held that the Police are not empowered to investigate into the offence punishable under Section 188 of IPC and file charge sheet basing on a police report. In the case on hand, since^theCourt has taken cognizance of the offence based on the charge^sheet filed by the Police, the procedure adopted is not in^accordance with law, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner for the offence under Section 188 of IPC would amount of abuse ofprocess of the Court.”

¶92

Insofar as the offence punishable under Section 171H IPC is concerned, a bald statement made by the informant shorn of any details. Even if the entire accusations made against the Petitioner^aretakenas true and correct, no prima facie case for the offence punishable under Section 17IH IPC has been made out against the Petitioner. Further, the offence under Section 17IH IPC is a non-cognizable^offence. At this stage, it is relevant to extract Section 155 of Cr.P.C.,^whichreads as under.

¶93

“155. Information as to non-cognizable cases and investigation of such cases.—(1) When information is given to an officer in charge of a police station of the commission^within the limits of such station of a non-cognizable offence, he shall enter or cause to be entered the substance of the information^ina. book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State

¶94

Government may prescribe in this behal,f and refer the informant to the Magistrate. (2) No police ofifcer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try^such case or commit the case for trial. (3) Any police ofifcer receiving such order may exercise the same powers in respect of the investigation (except the power to arrest without warrant) as an ofifcer in charge of a police station may exercise in a cognizable case. (4) Where a case relates to two or more offences of which^atleast one is cognizable, the case shall be deemed to be a cognizable case, notwithstanding that the other offences are noncognizable. ”

¶95

In view of the above provision, no Police Officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial. Hence, continuation of the impugned proceedings against the Petitioner for the offences under Sections 17IH and 188 IPC, is nothing but an abuse of process of Court.

¶96

Hence, following the said Order passed by this Court in Criminal

¶97

Petition No. 459 of 2020, dated 09.11.2023, and taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, these criminal petitions are allowed by quashing the proceedings against^{thePetitioner} in C.C.Nos.93, 132, 131, 94, 144 and 128 of 2019 respectively^onthefile of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nagari, registered for the offence under Sections 17IH and 188 IPC.

¶98

Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶99

//TRUE COPY//

¶100

Sd/- K.TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶101

¶102

To, 1.. The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nagari, Chittoor^District 2. The Station House Officer, Vijayapurarn P S., Chittoor^District. 3 One CC to Sri Masthan Naidu Cherukuri Advocate [OPUg 4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of^{AndhraPradeshat}

¶103

Amaravathi [OUT]

¶104