T. MOHAN RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, who is the writ petitioner, filed the present appeal under Clause-XV of Letters Patent, assailing the order, dated 01.12.2020, passed in W.P.No.22607 of 2020, whereby the plea of the petitioner that the charge memo has to be quashed, due to deletion of Section 406 I.P.C. in the charge-sheet, has been rejected.

(2.) The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition show that writ petitioner herein was selected as Police Constable in the year 1984. He was initially promoted as Head Constable and then as Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police in the year 2014. While things stood thus, the daughter-in-law of the petitioner lodged a report before the Superintendent of Police, Nellore, on 09-09-2019, against the petitioner and petitioner' son, wife and daughter, which led to registration of a case in crime No.98 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406 I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner also claims to have lodged a report on 29.07.2019 in Balaji Nagar Police Station, Nellore, against the relatives of his daughter-in-law, which was registered as crime No.187 of 2009. In so far as the crime registered against the petitioner and others, the Police investigated into the matter and filed a charge sheet for the offences punishable under Section 498-A I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(3.) The averments in the affidavit further show that on 09.07.2020 the 4th respondent directed the petitioner to attend for oral enquiry on 15.07.2020 and accordingly the petitioner appeared before him and sought for time, which was accepted. Though the petitioner was directed to appear on 08.10.2020, he did not do so as he was unwell and the same was conveyed to the 4th respondent. Thereafter, the present Writ Petition came to be filed challenging the charge memo. By its order, dated 01.02.2020, the learned single Judge rejected the plea of the petitioner holding that two proceedings are independent of each other and that the F.I.R. cannot be the basis for issuance of charge memo. The Court also directed the petitioner to raise the objections, if any, before the Enquiry Officer. With the above direction, the Writ Petition was dismissed. Challenging the same, the present appeal is filed.