IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRL.P.NO.3433 OF 2010. Date:19.04.2010 Between:- Thalluri Raja Kishore ..Petitioner/A-3 And The State of A.P., rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. at Hyderabad, through Sub Inspector of Police, III Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam. .. Respondent/Complainant ORDER:- This petition is filed by the third accused in C.C.No.489 of 2008 and he is accused of offences punishable under Sections 509, 109, 506 and 120-B I.P.C. 2. A-2 is husband of the defacto complainant. A-1 is father of A-2. It is stated that there are marital and maintenance proceedings between A-2 and the defacto complainant. It is alleged that A-1 approached A-3, who is Branch Manager of Globe Detective Agency Private Limited, Visakhapatnam for collecting evidence against the defacto complainant regarding her employment in H.D.F.C. Bank and that A-2 paid Rs.18,000/- to A-3 by way of cheque and that A-3 deputed A-4 and A-5 for the said purpose and that on 16.03.2007, A-4 and A-5 tried to take photographs of the defacto complainant when she was moving with her friend and drinking sugarcane juice and that when the defacto complainant questioned A-4 and A-5 about taking her photos, they grew wild against her and abused her in foul language and misbehaved with her by insulting her modesty and also threatened her with dire consequences. 3. It is contended that as per memorandum of association of A-3’s company and as per work sheet given by A-3 to A-4 and A- 5, the activity undertaken by A-3 to A-5 is legal and in accordance with objects of the company. Though private detective agency business is not illegal, they have to employ legal means for collection of evidence. This Court, in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., cannot go into defences of the accused basing on documents to be filed by the accused. 4. It is contended that no photographs are filed along with the charge sheet to show that photographs of the complainant are taken by A-4 and A-5. Even as per the defacto complainant’s case, she snatched camera from A-5 and deleted the photos from the camera and returned the same. Therefore, question of filing photographs along with charge sheet may not arise at all. 5. Therefore, for all the above reasons, I find that there are no valid and legal grounds for quashing charge sheet in this case. 6. Even though no ground is taken in this petition, it is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that though the charge sheet is filed by the police alleging offences under sections 509, 109, 506 and 120-B I.P.C., the lower Court took the case on file mechanically under Section 498-A I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against A-1 to A-5. Though this ground is not taken in the petition, when it has come to knowledge of this Court about an irregularity or impropriety committed by the lower Court, this Court can take note of it and suggest remedial measures. The petitioner filed certified copy of charge sheet along with cognizance endorsement of the Magistrate. It is evident that the First Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam was mislead by the office note of the Ministerial Officer on the charge sheet. In the office note of the Ministerial Officer, it was stated that the Sub Inspector of Police filed charge sheet against A-1 to A-5 under Section 498-A I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The said office note further led the Magistrate to repeat the same mistake in the order of taking cognizance. In the circumstances, the First Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam is directed to recall summons issued to A-1 to A-5 and rectify the mistake committed by him/her and proceed according to Law. 7. Subject to above observations, the petition is dismissed. Copy of this order shall be marked to the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam for taking necessary departmental action against the Ministerial Officer, who has put up such office note on the charge sheet. _​_________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J 19th April 2010 AMD