K.CHIRANJEEVI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Criminal Original Petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for the records in STC.No.29 of 2011 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate II, Hosur and quash the final report.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a complaint has been given by the Village Administrative Officer, Berigai against the petitioner for conducting a road show in favour of the candidate for the Hosur Assembly Constituency in the 2011 elections to the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly without obtaining prior permission from the concerned authority. On the basis of the above said allegation, the respondent police registered the complaint and filed a charge sheet against the petitioner and others for the offences under Sections 143, r/w 188 IPC in STC No.29 of 2011, on the file the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Hosur. Therefore, he sought for quashing the proceeding.

(3.) Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner along with others conducted a road show in favour of the candidate for the Hosur Assembly Constituency in the 2011 elections to the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly without obtaining prior permission from the concerned authority. Further, he would submit that Section 188 of IPC is a cognizable offence and therefore it is the duty of the police to register a case. Though there is a bar under Section 195(a)(i) of Cr.P.C. to take cognizance for the offence under Section 188 of IPC, it does not mean that the police cannot register FIR and investigate the case. More over, the petitioner is an habitual offender by committing these kind of crimes. Therefore, he vehemently opposed the quash petition and prayed for dismissal of the same.