THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.6702 of 2011 ORDER: Petitioner approaches this Court by invoking the provisions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.7 of 2011 on the file of the Special Judge for CBI Cases at Visakhapatnam, where in he is arrayed as A2 for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 120-B of IPC. Heard. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner, at the time of offence was working as Inspector, RPF Station at Chirala whereas the 1st accused was working as constable in RPF outpost at Bapatla, within the administrative jurisdiction of the petitioner. The de facto complainant, who was running a scrap shop at Bapatla, gave a complaint to the CBI Inspector camping at Bapatla to the effect that A1 constable was demanding bribe of Rs.5000/- and he was not willing to pay on which the FIR was registered and that on 10.08.2009 pre-trap proceedings were recorded arranging a trap against the 1st accused and that the 1st accused was caught red-handed by CBI team having demanded and accepted the bribe amount, when the CBI officials questioned him, he stated that he collected the said amount at the behest of the petitioner herein and that the CBI team asked him to make a phone call to the petitioner herein and the said conversation was recorded on a digital voice recorder. Hence, both the accused are liable for prosecution. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is no way concerned with the alleged offence. There are no specific overt acts against the petitioner except the statement of A1 that he collected the money at the behest of the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner was falsely implicated in this case and the proceedings against him may be quashed. In this case, after completion of due investigation, respondent- police filed charge sheet and the charge sheet reveals prima facie allegations against the petitioner. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the trial at this stage. However, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel, the presence of the petitioner before the trial Court is dispensed with except the dates on which the learned Magistrate insists for the same and he shall properly be represented through his counsel. With above observation, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions filed in this Criminal Petition, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 26th August 2011 Rns