THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8476 of 2011 Dated 30.03.2011 Between: Bellapu Nageswara Rao and another …Petitioners And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Hyderabad and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri Bellapu Nageswara Rao Counsel for respondent No.1: Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj Counsel for respondent No.2: Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise Counsel for respondent No.3: Assistant Government Pleader for Home Counsel for respondent No.4: Sri G. Elisha, standing counsel for Gram Panchayats The Court made the following: ORDER: The accused in a criminal case filed this writ petition on a thorough misconception that the Sarpanch of a Gram Panchayat is empowered to pass a resolution on their innocence and grant various directions to the Police and excise officials in connection with the criminal cases pending against them. I have heard petitioner No.1, who claims to be a coolie, but is very eloquent in presenting the case. According to him, as the petitioners have sought to espouse the cause of one Katta Dhanalakshmi, whose husband is stated to have been done away with by the Excise Officials, they were implicated in criminal cases with mala fide intention of harassing them. The petitioners are stated to have approached respondent No.4, who is the Sarpanch of Muthyalapalli Gram Panchayat, and in her purported exercise of her emergency powers under Section 33 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short ‘the Act’), she passed a resolution. The present writ petition is filed for enforcement of the said resolution. A perusal of the contents of the resolution would indicate that respondent No.4 made all out efforts to term the petitioners as innocents and has granted certain directions to the excise and police officials not to arrest the petitioners till such an enquiry into the allegations made against them is held by the Gram Sabha. In my opinion, the purported resolution of respondent No.4 completely falls foul of the provisions of the Act and far too exceeds the powers and functions of the Gram Panchayat prescribed under the Act. The Gram Panchayats are constituted at the primary level for local self- governance. Under Section 3 of the Act, the Gram Panchayat is a body corporate. Part II of the Act containing Chapters II to V deal with the powers and functions of the Gram Panchayats. A perusal of the various provisions falling under these Chapters would not even remotely suggest that either the Gram Panchayat or the Sarpanch can interfere with a criminal case registered against individuals and issue directions in that connection. Whether the petitioners are guilty or innocent will be adjudicated by the competent criminal Courts constituted under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It is no part of function of respondent No.4 to interfere with this power of the Court. Therefore, in my opinion, the petitioners cannot seek a mandamus for enforcement of a purported resolution which completely falls outside the scope of the provisions of the Act and the powers and functions of the Gram Panchayat. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is wholly misconceived and hence, the same is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.10537 of 2011 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 30th March, 2011 GHN