IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13079 of 2010 Between: Mohd. Jameeluddin … Petitioner And The Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda District & others. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P. Vara Prasada Rao for Sri D. Kanaka Sundar Counsel for respondents 1&2: AGP for Home The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13079 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to quash FIR No.20 of 2010 dated 29.01.2010 and direct the respondents to pay damages to the petitioner. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. The petitioner is the owner of lorry bearing No.AP 29V 2871. The said lorry was intercepted on 29.01.2010 at 6.00 a.m. at Mellacheruvu road near Kodad by the task force team along with 10 other lorries. Thereafter, the Tahsildar, Kodad addressed letter No.407/2010, dated 29.01.2010 to respondent No.2 to take appropriate action. Accordingly, respondent No.2 registered FIR No.20 of 2010 under Section 379 IPC and sections 35(1) and 24 of The Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002 for illegal transportation of the sand. The present writ petition is filed seeking quashing of the said FIR. In his affidavit, the petitioner averred that he has lent his lorry to one Shanmukha and company of Gottumukkala Village, Kanchikcherla Mandal, Krishna District for transportation of sand from Chevitikallu Village to Hyderabad on hire, that his lorry was loaded with sand of a quantity of 12 cubic metres as per the capacity of the vehicle under way bill TIN No.28530269481, dated 28.01.2010 and that the said company, which hired the petitioner’s lorry, also paid royalty. The petitioner has therefore averred that though the sand load was covered by valid permit and waybill, it was seized illegally and the criminal case has been registered without any basis. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above pleas. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, however, placed reliance on a mediators’ report, wherein the mediators have allegedly recorded the statement of Dharavath Hanumanth Naik, who is the driver of the lorry in question and submitted that as the driver has admitted that the sand load does not have any waybill or permission, a criminal case was registered. A perusal of letter dated 29.01.2010 addressed by respondent No.3 to respondent No.2 shows that the lorry belonging to the petitioner and 10 other lorries were found illegally transporting the sand. On the basis of this letter, the criminal case has been registered. The jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is exercised for quashing the criminal proceedings only in cases where the allegations contained in the First Information Report or the charge sheet do not disclose commission of an offence. A perusal of the contents of the said letter discloses commission of an offence. While it is for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused, it is premature for this Court to render any finding at this stage on the merits of the case. In this view of the matter, I do not find any reason to interfere with the criminal proceedings at this stage. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.16482 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed. __________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 28.07.2010. ES