THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJU CRIMINAL PETITION No.7300 of 2009 BETWEEEN: Medida Ram Kumar, S/o.Rama Rao … Petitioner AND 1. The State of A.P. … Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.7300 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner/A1 is accused of offences punishable under Sections 188 and 171 E/34 I.P.C. in CC.No.72 of 2009 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Razole, East Godavari District. It is alleged that on 22.04.2009, the Village Revenue Officer and others intercepted Ambassador Car bearing No. AP 05B-5139 in which A1 was sitting and which was being driven by A2 and when it is checked, cash of Rs.31,000/-, two TDP Yellow coloured upper cloths and 16 packets of election material were found in it. They were seized under the cover of mediators report. As per Panchanama, those 16 packets contained material to be delivered to the election agents like Form No.10, two white papers, two pens, one pencil. According to the petitioner’s counsel, the amount of Rs.31,000/- was reflected in the election account of the candidate and it was meant for distribution to the election agents towards Batta. As the matter now stands, no such election account is produced before this Court. There is no material to show how A1 was connected with the said general elections. 2. At the same time, it is not prosecution case that there was any bribery of the voters either committed or attempted to be committed by A1 with the amount of Rs.31,000/- being carried in the car. In the absence of any such allegation, the fats alleged in the charge sheet taken on their face value, do not constitute any offence punishable under Section 171 E I.P.C. Insofar as the offence punishable under Section 188 I.P.C. is concerned, the Sub-Inspector of Police who laid the charge sheet before the lower Court is not competent to do so, in view of Section 195(1)(a)(I) Cr.P.C. According to the prosecution, by the impugned action of the accused, there is violation of moral code of conduct during general elections. As per Section 195(1) Cr.P.C., in case there is any offence committed by any person punishable under Section 188 I.P.C., then the complaint should be instituted by “the officer concerned”, who promulgated notification bringing election code of conduct into force. Certainly, the Sub-Inspector of Police who laid the charge sheet is not that officer who issued the election notification. Therefore, the charge sheet filed by the Sub- Inspector of Police alleging the offence under Section 188 I.P.C. is not maintainable; and the lower Court should not have taken cognizance of the said offence. 3. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed quashing proceedings in CC.No.72 of 2009 in the lower Court insofar as the petitioner/A1 is concerned. _____________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J Dated: 24.03.2011 ysk THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJUL CRIMINAL PETITION No.7300 of 2009 DATED: 24.03.2011 ysk