BALLA RAVINDRANATH Vs. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners 1 and 2/A.9 and A.10 are accused of offences punishable under Sections 16, 17, 18, 18-B, 19, 20, 38, 39 and 40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (in short, the Act) and Section 120B IPC along with 8 others. It is alleged that when Inspector of Police, Gudur Circle on 09.06.2012 at about 5:30 hours was conducting vehicle checking along with other Police Officers and personnel near Petrol Bunk at Khanapur outskirts in view of Parkal Bye-elections, he received phone call from Inspector of Police, Narsampet Circle informing about a maroon colour Qualis Vehicle bearing No.AP12C 4374 coming towards Gudur without stopping at Narsampet inspite of a signal from the police to stop the vehicle and that he alerted the staff to stop the said vehicle in front of Indian Oil Petrol Bunk and that after it was stopped, the vehicle was checked and that A.1 to A.7 were occupying the vehicle and that when they were interrogated in the presence of two mediators and Tahsildar of Khanapur, they revealed their identities and gave their separate statements. It is alleged that A.1 to A.7 are from Maoist party which was banned under Section 35(1) of the Act. It is further alleged that A.6, in her statement in the presence of mediators, stated that she has contacts with and assistance of A.8 to A.10 in attracting youth and recruiting them into Maoist party. A.8 is described as Ex State Committee Member of Maoist party and President of 'Amarula Bandhumithrula Committee' and A.9 and A.10 are described as from Telangana Praja Front, which is a Maoist frontal organization. After taking A.1 to A.7 into custody, K.Rajasekhara Raju, Inspector of Police, Gudur Circle gave written report to the Station House Officer of Khanapur Police Station and produced A.1 to A.7 in the Police Station along with panchanama and seized articles. Thereupon, V.Rajender, Head Constable registered written report of Inspector of Police, Gudur Circle as case in Cr.No.47 of 2012 and issued F.I.R. A.9 and A.10 filed this Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in the said Cr.No.47 of 2012 of Khanapur Police Station of Warangal District.

(2.) IT is contended by Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners that the petitioners are social and cultural activists fighting for separate Telangana Statehood and are working in Telangana Praja Front. According to the prosecution/Police, Telangana Praja Front is a Maoist frontal organization. It is the prosecution case that in exercise of powers conferred by Section 35(1) of the Act, the Government of India in its Gazettee No.954 Extraordinary dated 22.06.2009 published S.O. 1525 (E) making an order adding the Communist Party of India (Maoist) and all its formations and front organizations as terrorist organizations in the Schedule to the said Act as serial number 34.

(3.) SECTION 43 prescribes rank of the Investigating Officer. Investigation starts after registration of the crime under Section 154 Cr.P.C. Sections 155 to 176 Cr.P.C. occurring in Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deal with investigation and powers of the Police Officers to investigate into a crime. In the case on hand, Inspector of Police, Gudur Circle during routine vehicle check, detected the offence and gave First Information Report to the Station House Officer, who is Head Constable in Khanapur Police Station. Neither Inspector of Police, Gudur Circle nor Head Constable in Khanapur Police Station took up any investigation in this case. They are only in the nature of first informant and the person who registered the said First Information Report in the Police Station. It is only after registration of the First Information Report, the question of taking up further steps by way of investigation arises. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Inspector of Police or the Head Constable is an Investigating Officer in this crime and consequently registration of this crime is illegal. In my opinion, registration of this crime does not offend Section 43 of the Act.