LAWS(APH)-1992-11-6

T VENKAT RAM REDDY Vs. D GOPALAKRISHNAM RAJU

Decided On November 23, 1992
T.VENKAT RAM REDDY Appellant
V/S
D. GOPALAKRISHNAM RAJU Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case is directed, at the instance of the petitioner, against the order of II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, dated 13/08/1991, passed in Crl.M.P. No. 784 of 1991 in C.C. No. 4 of 1990, on his file, refusing to grant permission for withdrawal of the prosecution against the petitioner-accused.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of this revision are briefly as follows :- Defamatory material (Ex. P. 2) was published against the 1st respondent herein, viz., Mr. D. Gopalakrishnam Raju, I.P.S., Deputy Commissioner of Police, Administration, Hyderabad City Police, Hyderabad, who is a public servant. He is the aggrieved person. Pursuant to the application filed by him, the State Government accorded sanction under S. 199 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to prosecute the accused and the Special Public Prosecutor, Sri. Sitapathi was also appointed to conduct prosecution. The sanction was given as per G.O. No. 3623 dated 15-9-1986 which was later clarified by amended G.O. issued on 20-9-1986 in G.O. Nos. 3023 and 3708. Thereafter, G.O. Rt. No. 4279 dated 21-11-1990 was issued by the Government instructing the Special Public Prosecutor to withdraw the case against the accused. Ultimately the lower Court refused permission to withdraw the prosecution. It is against that order the present revision is preferred by the petitioner-accused.

(3.) Mr. C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently contended that since the Government is the sanctioning authority under section 199 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to sanction prosecution in cases of defamation of any public servant employed in connection with the affairs of the State, it is equally competent to accord permission for withdrawal of the prosecution and that the same cannot be refused by the Court. He also contended that under section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure no reasons need be given by the Public Prosecutor for withdrawing the prosecution. He has also cited the decision of the Supreme Court reported in Sheo Nandan Paswan v. State of Bihar, AIR 1987 SC 877 : 1987 Cri LJ 793, in support of his contention that the Court has to give its consent for withdrawal of the prosecution without looking for any reasons. It was held in the above said decision by the Supreme Court as follows :-