Allowed

Naini Yadagiri v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Mar 2023CRLP/18/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Petition to quash proceedings challenging the validity of cognizance taken for offences under Sections 188 and 341 IPC. Court allowed the petition holding Section 195 Cr.P.C. bars Section 188 offences and Section 341 not made out.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to Additional Judicial Magistrate to stop proceedings against petitioners in C.C.No.228 of 2019.

Naini Yadagiri Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32sl ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF IV1ARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K,SURENDER

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 18 OF 2020

¶7

Between:

¶8

Naini Yadagiri, S/o late Ramulu, age 49 years, occ- Business, R/o 9-167/8/8, Gajwel town, Gajwel Mandal, Siddipet District.

¶9

lrllirza Azharulla Baig, S/o Miza Ameer Baig, age 48 years, R/o H.No.10-18/4, Gajwel town, Gajwel Mandal, Siddipet District (wrongly mentioned Mr.Md. Sajid Miza Baig @ Sajid in C.C.22B of 2019 A 21)

¶10

...pETrroNERS/AccusED No.1s & 21

¶11

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the state ofrelangana' Hyderabad

¶13

....Respondenu Respondent

¶14

h/ohd.Yousuf, Sub.lnspector of Police, Gajwel Police Station, Siddipet District .,.RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶15

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^'praying that in the circumstances stated in the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the Proceedings in C.C.No.228 of 2019 on the file of Additional Judicial lv'lagistrate of First Class at Gajwel, Siddipet District in respect of the Petitioners/Accused No. 15 and 21

¶16

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2020

¶17

Petition under Section 482 ot Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the Petitioners /Accused No.15 and 21 in C.C.No.228 ot 2019 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Gajwel, Siddipet District.

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitlon and upon hearing the arguments of Sri PRABHAKAR SRIPADA, Advocate for the Petitioners and of the Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana on behalf of the Respondent No.1

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

¶21

Crl.Petition No.18 of 2020

¶22

¶23

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶24

CRIMINAL PETITION No.18 OF 202O

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the^petitioners - accused Nos.15 and 21 to quash the^proceedings against them in C.C.No.228 of 2019 pending on the file of Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate at Gajwel, Siddipet District, filed for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147,341 and 1BB read with 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short'IPC').

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the^petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the'State. Perused the record.

¶28

It is alleged by the 2nd respondent - de facto complainant who is the Sub Inspector of Police, Gajwel Police Station, Siddipet District, that these^petitioners and others were responsible for holding dharna in front of Ambedkar Statue on State HighwaylTftoopran-Buvanagiri Road and restrained the vehicles for 30 minutes. The said acts of the^petitioners and others resulted in

¶29

Crl.Petition No.18 of 2020

¶30

¶31

disturbance of peace and tranquility. Further, the said acts are in violation of Code of Election Conduct and Section 30 of Police Act.

¶32

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that Police had filed charge sheet and there is a prohibition under Section 195(1XaXi) of Cr.P.C. for taking cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 188 of IPC. Except the witnesses who are Police, none have complained regarding any kind of restraint made punishable under Section 341 of IPC. He relied on the^judgment of Dr.Kodela Siva .Prasad Rao and others v. Koritala Venkata Ramanaiah and anothe/. In the said case, this Court found that during a procession, the complqinant who was driving a car lodged a complaint stating that rally of the petitioner resulted in stopping him on the road, for which reason/ Section 341 of IPC is attracted. This Court found that under such circumstances, no ofFence is made out.

¶33

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that though the offence under Section 188 of IPC cannot be maintained, the petitioners have to undergo trial for the other offences.

¶34

':oor,^{(z) aLo (c.t.)692 (A?)}

¶35

Crl.Petition No.18 of 2020

¶36

¶37

The learned Magistrate has erred in taking cognizance for the offence^punishable under Section 1BB of IPC when there is a bar prescribed under Section 195(1XaXi) of Cr.P.C. The public servant concerned has to file a complaint in accordance with Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C. and charge sheet cannot be filed for the offence under Section 1BB of IPC. As seen from the list of witnesses, apart from the police personnel who were on duty, no one else who were allegedly detained for the reason of any acts of these petitioners are not examined. In the said circumstances, no offence under Section 341 of IPC is also made out against the petitioners.

¶38

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶39

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stan(closed.

¶40

Sd/-MOHD. ISMAIL ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //rRUE coPY/i (1,t

¶41

SECTION OFFICER

¶42

¶43

The Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Gajwel, Siddipet District. 2. One CC to Sri Prabhakar Sripada, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (OUT)

¶44