HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Criminal Petition No.6366 of 2014 Date: 20-6-2014 Between Nalamada Uttam Kumar Reddy … Petitioner/ Accused No.3 and The State of Telangana, Through SHO, Suryapet Town PS, Nalgonda District, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad … Respondent HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Criminal Petition No.6366 of 2014 Order:
The petitioner is accused No.3 in Crime No.152 of 2014 on the file of Suryapet Town Police Station, Nalgonda District. First Information Report (FIR) was issued under Sections 171-E and 511 IPC as well as under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (the R.P.Act, for short).
2. The petitioner is a Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) from Huzurnagar Constituency, Nalgonda District. On 30-4-2014, which was a day before elections in the Telangana area of the then composite Andhra Pradesh, an Innova Car was found to be in flames near Durga Bhavani Dhaba Shed, Suryapet. Police found that currency of Rs.1,000/- and Rs.500/- denominations were burning inside the car. Police suspected that some persons interested in the elections were transporting the amount for distribution to the voters. A case was initially registered against unknown persons. Subsequently, a report was submitted by Police to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Suryapet to treat the petitioner and his driver as accused. The petitioner consequently figured as accused No.3.
3. Sri D.V.Sitarama Murthy, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was no connection between the petitioner and the Innova Car. It would appear that the car possessed a sticker issued in 2009, which was valid till 31-3-2012 showing the name of accused No.3 as MLA. He further submitted that accused No.1 is the driver of the car. Accused No.2 is the Managing Director of the Company which owned the car.
4. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that neither the offence under Section 123 of the R.P.Act nor the offence under Section 171-E, IPC was made out against the petitioner. Section 171-E, IPC deals with punishment for bribery in connection with elections. There is no allegation that the petitioner was indulging in bribery at the time of elections. Section 123 of the R.P.Act deals with corrupt practices during elections. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that there was no prima facie allegation that the petitioner was indulging in corrupt election practices. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that the car was going from Kodad to Hyderabad. He also submitted that as many as 18 witnesses had already been examined by the Investigating Agency and that none of the witnesses examined by Police alleged that the petitioner indulged in bribery or an election offence. He also submitted that the very car was found outside the constituency of the petitioner.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that 18 witnesses were examined by the Investigating Agency. He submitted that the Innova Car was proceeding from Kodad to Hyderabad. He also submitted that the Forensic Science Laboratory opined that the fire occurred in the car owing to overheating of the engine. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that Section 123 of the R.P.Act is being deleted at the time of the filing of the charge-sheet.
6. It may be noticed that the name of the petitioner has not figured in the FIR. The petitioner was not found near the burning car. The petitioner is not the owner of the car. There is no allegation by anyone that the petitioner was resorting to election malpractices including bribery. Thus, neither the offence under Section 171-E, IPC nor the offence under Section 123 of the R.P.Act prima facie is made out against the petitioner.
The complaint and subsequent investigation is such that it did not pinpoint the accusation at the petitioner.
I therefore agree with the contention of the learned Senior Counsel that no case is made out prima facie against the petitioner for any of the offences alleged through the FIR in Crime No.152 of 2014. I therefore consider it appropriate to quash the FIR so far as the petitioner- accused No.3 is concerned.
7. Accordingly, this criminal petition is allowed. The FIR in Crime No.152 of 2014 of Suryapet Town Police Station, Nalgonda Distrtict is quashed so far as the petitioner-accused No.3 is concerned. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this petition shall stand closed.
Dr. K.G.SHANKAR, J.
20th June, 2014. Ak HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Criminal Petition No.6366 of 2014 20th June, 2014. (Ak)