CHAPALA VIJAYKUMAR Vs. STATEOF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1 of 2000 pending on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-I Additional Sessions Judge, Krishna, Machilipatnam.

(2.) A public spirited practicing Advocate and Reporter, filed a complaint before the learned Magistrate alleging misappropriation of public fund worth of Rs. 1,61,520/-by the petitioner/accused No.1, who worked as Municipal Commissioner of Machilipatnam Municipality, in purchase of street lights causing heavy loss to the Machilipatnam Municipality. It is stated that the Municipality had arranged 4772 streetlights in Municipal limits, out of these 4772 streetlights, only 25% lights are working and other lights are not functioning due to various defects. Government of Andhra Pradesh issued Circular to all the Municipalities in A.P to purchase lights from HMT unit. On 28.08.2006, the petitioner addressed a letter to HMT Lamps Unit, Hyderabad for supply of streetlights. The said letter was replied by HMT Unit willing to supply 40W Fluorescent lamps at the rate of Rs.27.45, 40W starter at the rate of Rs.6.00 and 250W HPMV lamp chose at the rate of Rs.500/- each with additional APGST @ 16%. Accordingly, HMT Lamp Unit issued invoice for Rs.96,802/- subject to 100% advance payment by demand draft in favour of HMT Limited payable at Hyderabad. Accused No.l received a letter from Accused No.2 on 13.09.1996 quoting to supply 40 W Floursent tube @ Rs.44/- and 40W starter Rs.8.90/- and 250W M.V. lamp chose @ Rs.890/- and 40W copper choke @ Rs.148/-, which was accepted by Accused No.1, and that in the process, he caused loss to the Machilipatnam Municipality. Hence, the complainant filed the complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-I Additional District Judge, Krishna, Machilipatnam, who forwarded the same to the Station House Officer, Robertsonpet Police Station under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C for investigation and report. The police, after due investigation, laid the charge sheet, which was taken on file as C.C.No.1 of 2000 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate for the offences punishable under Sections 420,409,468,471,485,486 r/w Section 120(B) IPC and issued summons to the petitioner. Heard both sides.

(3.) It is alleged in the charge sheet that the petitioner, while functioning as the Commissioner of Machilipatnam Municipality, placed orders for supply of streetlights with Accused No.3 on the letter issued by Accused No.2, instead of placing the orders with the HMT Unit, Hyderabad, as per the Circular issued by the Government of A.P. to the Municipalities to purchase lights from HMT Unit only. In the process of purchase of the electrical material, the Municipality has sustained loss, which is an act purported to have been done by the petitioner as the Commissioner of the Municipality.