JABEEN SULTANA Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Report given by the Sub Inspector of Police, West Zone (Task Force) alleging that the management of Gazali Public School disfigured a public place by hanging banner, and thus committed an offence under A.P. Prevention of Disfigurement of Open Place and Prohibition of Obscene and Objectionable Posters and Advertisements Act, 1997 (for short 'the Act'), was registered by the Station House Officer, Golconda Police Station, as Crime No. 83 of 2003 and after investigation, the Inspector of Police, Golconda Police Station, filed a charge-sheet against the petitioner for an offence under Section 4 of the Act, which was taken on file as C.C.No. 716 of 2003 by the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate. This petition is filed to quash the said C.C.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner strongly relying on Surajmani Srimali v. State of Orissa contends that in view of Section 15 of the Act which lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in Code of Criminal Procedure (for short - 'the code') offences punishable under Section 3 and 4 of the Act are deemed to be cognizable offences and since Section 16 of the Act lays down that courts cannot take cognizance of any offence under the Act except on a 'complaint' filed by the officer mentioned therein, and since 'complaint' as per Section 2(d) of the Code does not include 'police report' and since 'police report', as per Section 2(n) of the Code, means a report forwarded by a Police Officer to a Magistrate under Section 173 (2) of the Code and since the charge-sheet in this case shows that it is filed under Section 173 of the Code, it is clear that it is a 'police repor but not a 'complaint' as defined in Sec. 2(d) c the Code and so the same is liable to be quashed. Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

(3.) Section 16 of the Act reads,