Allowed

K.Pawan Kalyan, v. The State

Telangana HC15 Sept 2009CRLP/5024/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment quashed criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner arising from an incident where he was garlanded by party members without prior speech permission, dismissing charges on grounds of lack of guilt and absence of requisite mens rea.

What did the court decide?

The further proceedings in Crime No.156 of 2009 and any consequential criminal case were quashed; the Criminal Petition was allowed.

K.Pawan Kalyan, Vs The State — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION NO : 5024 of 2009

Between:

K.Pawan Kalyan

. .Petitioner

And

The State of A.P., rep. By Public Prosecutor

¶10

.. Respondent

¶11

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD

¶12

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5024 of 2009

¶13

ORDER :

¶14

Heard Sri P.Gangaiah Naidu, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.Nageswara Rao, learned Public Prosecutor for the sole respondent.

¶15

2) Crime No.156 of 2009 of III Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam city was registered against the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 188, 341 and 143 of Indian Penal Code.

¶16

3) No case under Section 143 of Indian Penal Code could have been registered against a single individual as the said provision prescribes punishment for being a member of an unlawful assembly, which assembly should be a minimum of five persons or more.

¶17

4) The allegations in the complaint show that the police constable,

¶18

who gave the complaint was on patrol duty and he only found that some Praja Rajyam Party members garlanded the petitioner and when the petitioner was informed that there was no permission obtained to make any speech, the petitioner went away without continuing to address the public. As such, it is obvious that the petitioner only started addressing the public and the moment the petitioner was informed by the police constable about the absence of any permission, he went away and no mens rea to indulge in any culpable conduct can be attributed to the petitioner. The report by the police constable does not in any manner disclose that any person was wrongfully restrained by the conduct of the petitioner or any others and for the mere fault of accepting the garland from the members of his political party, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for any offence. The further proceedings, therefore, have to be quashed. Any proceedings against the petitioner out of the said crime have to naturally collapse as an abuse of process of law.

¶19

6) Therefore, the further proceedings in Crime No.156 of 2009 of III Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam city are quashed and any consequential criminal case initiated in pursuance of the said first information report also shall be consequentially quashed and the Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶20

__________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J

¶21

September 15, 2009 KSH

K.Pawan Kalyan, v. The State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Pawan Kalyan, v. The State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Sree Lakshmi Sai Agro Chemicals, Vs Swal Corporation Ltd.

Smt. C.Bhagya Lakshmi, Vs The Inspector

Smt. Sajida Begum , Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Konidela Siva Shankar Vara Prasad , Chiranjeevi, Vs The State of A.P.

P.Ravi Chandra, Vs State of A.P.

Chidurala Mallikarjuna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh