IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABALE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Criminal Petition No.1527 of 2009 Between: Y.Yadagiri Reddy … Petitioner/Accused and State, by SHO, Bommuru P.S., Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, Rep., trhough Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another. … Respondents THE HONOURABALE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Criminal Petition No.1527 of 2009 ORDER: This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the FIR No.48 of 2009 dated 08.03.2009 on the file of the P.S.Bommuru, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, whereunder the petitioner was charged for the offence under Section 188 IPC. According to the petitioner, brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a driver having all the required licenses. The petitioner is working with one Sri Addepalli Sridar Laxman, who is the prospective candidate for seat of Raj Assembly for PRP party. Said Sridhar Laxman has purchased campers van made by Eicher Motors and registered the same on 11.02.2009 by duly paying all the taxes to the Government of A.P., and the same was allotted registration number i.e., AP28 DB 2772 by the Regional Transport Authority, R.R.District. The vehicle was later designed at Hyderabad for campaign purpose by fixing speakers on it and it was made ready for campaign to be made in Rajahmundry rural constituency. Further, the owner of the vehicle has made an application to the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Rajahmundry sub division, seeking licence for the use of loudspeaker. The Sub Divisional police officer by his proceedings dated 16.02.2009 granted licence for the use of loudspeaker in Rajahmundry Sub Division Limits during the dates 18.02.2009 to 18.03.2009 between 8 a.m., to 9 p.m. As per the norms of Election Commission, the owner has to make an application before the competent authority for use of vehicles for campaign purpose, in which case, the appropriate authority is the Returning Officer i.e., the 2nd respondent. Therefore, the owner made an application to the 2nd respondent on 07.03.2009, seeking permission to use his two vehicles i.e., 1) Eicher Carvan Van bearing No.AP-28 DB 2772 and 2) Qalis motor vehicle bearing No.AP-09 AY 9, for campaign purpose and the RDO, Rajahmundry granted permission. It is further submitted that Eicher Carvan Van bearing registration No.AP 28DB 2772, which is designed for campaign purpose at Hyderabad has to be brought to Rajahumdry for getting it ready for campaign. For that purpose, the owner of the vehicle made arrangements for bringing the vehicle to Rajahmundry through the petitioner and when the vehicle was in transit, it has stopped in Sri Sai Balaji Filling Station, for re-reeling itself on 08.03.2009. When the vehicle entered Lalaceruvu area, it was obstructed by one B.Mallikarjuna Reddy, Special Officer, and high handedly taken the vehicle for no reason, and handed over the vehicle and the petitioner to the Bommuru Police Station with a written report stating that on 08.03.2009, he received an anonymous call at 12:30 pm., about plying of unauthorized vehicle bearing No.AP 28DB 2772 for election campaign and when he proceeded towards spinning mill, Lalacheruvu and noticed a vehicle designed as campaign vehicle with 14 loudspeakers with Prajarajyam Symbol and party name and on an enquiry, the driver was unable to produce the permission letter from returning officer and sought necessary action. It is submitted that without application of mind and with mala fide intention a crime was registered vide Crime No.48 of 2009 Bommuru Police Station and the petitioner was arrested and later released on bail. It is also submitted that the vehicle was only in transit from Hyderabad to Rajahmundry and was never used for campaign purpose and even the allegations made in the written report given by the 2nd respondent does not speak about the vehicle being used for election campaign. In pursuant to the letter of the District Collector dated 08.03.2009, the Returning Officer, Rajahmundry City Assembly Constituency and RDO, issued proceedings dated 09.03.2009 granting permission to use the Eicher caravan van bearing No.AP 28DB 2772 for campaign purpose from 09.03.2009 to 21.04.2009. In the above proceedings, the Returning Officer also mentioned that the vehicle is seized by the team for implementation of model code of conduct and handed over to the police. Therefore, initiation of criminal proceedings in FIR 48 of 2009 of Bommuru Police Station on 08.03.2009 is nothing but abuse of process and hence the same is sought to be quashed in these proceedings. The learned counsel for the petitioner, accused, while reiterating the said facts, inter alia, submitted that the allegations made against the petitioner does not constitute any offence punishable under Section 188 IPC and therefore, FIR No.48 of 2009 is liable to be quashed. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor would submit that on 08.03.2009 when the vehicle bearing No.AP 28DB 2772 was stopped, the petitioner was unable to produce the permission letter given by the competent authority but the same was obtained after handing over the said vehicle to the Police i.e., on 09.03.2009. As the allegations made against the petitioner are specific, the trial is commenced and the five witnesses were examined. Therefore, this Court need not to interfere with the proceedings initiated against the petitioner. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material on record. Admittedly, the vehicle bearing No.AP 28DB 2772, along with the petitioner, was handed over to the Bommuru Police on 08.03.2009 on the ground that the said vehicle was using unauthorisedly for the purpose of election campaigning. From a perusal of the record, the competent authority i.e., the Returning Officer, issued vehicle pass on 09.03.2009 according permission from 09.03.2009 to 21.04.2009, which clearly shows that the permission obtained after handing over the said vehicle to the Bommuru Police. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor that the charge sheet is filed, trial is commenced and the five witnesses were examined, it is not desirable to quash the proceedings in FIR. No.48 of 2009, at this juncture. In view of the above, this criminal petition is dismissed. _________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 19.10.2011 LSK