STATE OF TELANGANA Vs. JERUSALEM MATHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Special Leave Petitions are filed against the order of the High Court, quashing the crime registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau Police Station, City Range-I, Hyderabad as against A4.

(2.) Dr. Menaka Guruswamy, learned Senior Counsel appeared for the State and Mr. G. Prakash, learned counsel appeared for the complainant in the separate Special Leave Petition. It was contended that the High Court has erred insofar as conducting a mini trial in the quashing proceedings which has been deprecated by this Court on many occasions. The FIR is read out to indicate that there is a cognizable offence made out, there were also recordings made, and the bribe amounts recovered, in which event, there should not have been an order of quashing at such a preliminary stage.

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents, however, pointed out that there was absolutely no material against A4, the petitioner before the High Court, and the quashing was on valid grounds as no cognizable offence being made out and the allegations made in the FIR and the complaint, at least against A4, are so improbable as to justify the quashing of the proceedings.