GARIMELLA SUBBA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This reference is made by a learned single Judge of this Court in view of conflicting decisions of this Court in D. Prabhakar Reddy v. District Collector, Kurnool, 1997 1 ALD 500, and in V. Nageswara Rao v. State of A.P., 2001 2 ALD(Cri) 564 In V. Nageswara Rao's case, referring to the decision in D. Prabhakar Reddy's case and also the decision in P. Narsaiah v. P. Raj Reddy, 1988 2 ALT 248, it is observed that in view of the legal position, there is no prohibition to initiate criminal proceedings against the petitioner therein. In A.D.S. Sarma v. Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Society, Amalapuram, E.G. District, 2002 5 ALD 520, it is held thus: (para 9)

(2.) On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor contended that the penal provisions under the Societies Act and the criminal prosecution are entirely different and distinct; that since a suspicion that prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 403, 406, 409, 420, 471 and 120B read with 34 IPC is made out, it is the statutory duty of police to conduct investigation and file report as contemplated under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and that the police need not wait till the date of fixing the liability under surcharge proceedings under Section 60 of the Societies Act on any person, and hence, he prays to reject the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners.

(3.) Section 60 of the Societies Act, 1964 reads thus: