IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION NO : 4421 of 2009 Between: K.Nagendra Rao @ Naga Babu and others . .Petitioners And The State of A.P., rep. By Public Prosecutor. .. Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION No.4421 of 2009 ORDER : Heard Sri P.Gangaiah Naidu, learned senior counsel for the petitioners and Sri C.Nageswara Rao, learned Public Prosecutor for the sole respondent. 2) The petitioners are facing prosecution in pursuance of the first information report registered in Crime No.40 of 2009 of Buchireddipalem Police Station of Nellore District, on the strength of police proceedings. The police proceedings state about the information received about the petitioners and others gathering on the road parking their vehicles and causing obstructions and inconvenience to the traffic by giving speeches standing on the vehicles using sound amplifiers. The police proceedings further state that the Election Code was accordingly violated. 3) The police proceedings did not specify about the presence of any independent witness for the alleged observation by the police officers and ex facie, if there was such a gathering as to necessitate rushing of the police party to the scene on information, there would never have been nobody to act as a mediator as mentioned in the police proceedings. The police proceedings also are not specific as to which part of the Election Code was violated by the petitioners and as to whether any such alleged violation amounts to violation of an order promulgated by a public servant lawfully empowered to promulgate such an order. The petitioners contend that they neither caused any wrongful restraint to any person nor violated any order promulgated by a public servant nor were they given any general or special notice of any such order in force for the violation of which they could have been subjected to criminal proceedings. If there is any violation of the Model Code of Conduct concerning the general elections, in the light of Section 195(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it is for the concerned election authorities to complain and not for a police officer or in any manner through the police proceedings. Therefore, ex facie, committal of any offence under Sections 188 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code by the petitioners appears incapable of being reasonably established even if the further investigation were to continue. 4) The first information report also refers to an offence punishable under Section 32 of the Police Act, 1861, but the police proceedings do not refer to any order promulgated under Section 30 of the said Act, the violation of which only could have led to attribution of such an offence to the petitioners, and under the above circumstances, the further continuance of criminal proceedings against the petitioners does not appear to be in the interests of justice and the inherent jurisdiction of this Court should be invoked, more so, as the petitioners rightly relied on Section 95 of the Indian Penal Code, under which such trivialities are brought within the scope of general exceptions under the Indian Penal Code. 5) Therefore, the further proceedings in Crime No.40 of 2009 of Buchireddipalem Police Station, Nellore district are quashed and the Criminal Petition is allowed accordingly. __________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J September 15, 2009 KSH