HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR Crl.P.No. 1919 of 2008 Date: 27-04-2010 Between: K. Narasimha Reddy ……….. Petitioner and The State of A.P. ………. Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR Crl.P.No. 1919 of 2008 ORDER: This Criminal Petition has been filed to expunge the observations, remarks and directions made against the petitioner at paragraph No.9 and 10 of the Judgment, dated 12-02-2007 in C.C.No.303 of 2002 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, kalwakurthy. The specific case of the prosecution is that on 09-08-2002 at about 11-00 hours the Accused in the said C.C., on seeing the police constable of Kalwakurthy Police Station, ran away from his house situated at Ellikal village leaving a plastic can containing 4 liters of I.D. liquor. The said plastic can was seized under a cover of panchanama in the presence of the mediators, wherein the petitioner herein is one of the mediators. The samples were drawn and they were sent for chemical analysis. After completing the investigation, the charge sheet has been filed against the Accused. The petitioner herein was examined as PW-2 in the said C.C. According to him, on the date of panchanama, one of the police constables, by name Lakshman Goud, came to MRO Office, Kalwakurthy and informed him that they apprehended the Accused in respect of the seizure of I.D. liquor from his possession and obtained his signature on a white paper. He says that at that time, the Accused was not present along with the police. He was declared hostile and cross-examined. In the cross-examination, he had stated that he was at MRO office and from there he was taken to Kalwakurthy Police Station and the panchanama was prepared in the Police Station. He has admitted that the contents of the panchanama were read over and explained to him and then only he signed on the said panchanama on that day. He says that the constable informed him that on seeing them the Accused ran away and subsequently, they have learnt the name of the Accused and therefore, the name of the accused was mentioned in the panchanama. He further deposed that he did not see the I.D. liquor in the plastic can in the police station and that no samples were drawn in his presence and no panch chits have been affixed as mentioned in the panchanama. At this stage, it cannot be decided as to which version is true and which version is false. But the fact remains that the contents of the panchanama were read over to PW-2, however, merely because the contents of the panchanama were read over to him, that does not mean that PW-2 deposed in callous manner before the Court. It is not the case of the prosecution that the Accused was present when PW-2 was brought to the police station or that the Accused ran away in his presence. As mentioned above, it cannot be definitely said that the version of the police or excise officials is always a gospel truth and whatever had been spoken by them is utterly false. In view of the same, I am of the view that the observations and the remarks made against the petitioner are unwarranted and similarly the direction given by the learned Magistrate is also not appropriate. Therefore, the impugned observations and the directions are liable to be expunged. Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed. The observations, remarks and directions made against the petitioner in the order, dated 12-02-2007 in C.C.No.203 of 2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kalwakurthy, are expunged. __________________ B. CHANDRA KUMAR, J Date: 27-04-2010 YCR