HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD Criminal Petition No.7624 of 2009 Dated : 18.09.2009 Between : ….. Petitioner a n d The State of A.P. ….. Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD Criminal Petition No.7624 of 2009 ORDER: Heard Sri A.Rama Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri A.Ramesh, learned counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor for the sole respondent. Crime No.63 of 2009 of Kandukuru Town Police Station, Prakasham District, was registered against the petitioner under Sections 188 and 171H of the Indian Penal Code and Section 123 of Representation of People Act on the strength of a mediator’s report under which 3500 blankets were seized which were stated to have been procured by the petitioner for distributing to the voters to influence the voting in violation of the model code of conduct in force during the period of General Elections. The petition and the material on record show that the matter is still under investigation. The claims of the petitioner that he is running a charitable trust and that he secured the blankets for distribution among the down trodden and poor people as a part of the charitable activities and the claims of the prosecution that the blankets were so purchased for distribution among the voters involve disputed questions of fact. The investigation by the statutory investigating agency midway cannot be stalled as it is only the evidence collected during such investigation, which will establish the probability or otherwise of either claims. Intercepting the investigation in the middle on the issues of fact raised by the petitioner about the purpose for which the blankets were secured will not be towards the ends of justice and will be beyond the scope of the summary enquiry under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Even after concluding the investigation and filing a report under Section 173 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Police, if still any offences could not have been even remotely attributed to the petitioner, it is always open to the petitioner to take recourse to appropriate remedies available to him under law and therefore, subject to that liberty to the petitioner, the criminal petition has to be now considered as premature and has to fail. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. ______________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J 18th September, 2009 SUR