VANGAL LACHI REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Petition is filed praying to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 23 of 2003 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Miryalaguda, filed against the petitioner herein and six others for the offences punishable under Sections 418, 420 and 468 of IPC. Based on the complaint lodged by the de facto complainant that unscrupulous elements are indulging in sale of bogus certificates of Diploma in Public Hygiene and Sanitation Technology, awarded by the Institute of Public Health Hygiene, by collecting Rs. 10,000/- to Rs.20,000/- from the candidates for the purpose of recruitment to the post of MPHA (M), a crime in Cr. No. 178/2002 was registered by the Assistant Sub Inspector, Miryalaguda Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 418, 420 and 468 IPC, and thereafter, he transferred the same to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Nalgonda, for further investigation, and the Sub-Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Nalgonda, having investigated the case, filed charge sheet. Hence, the petitioner filed this criminal petition to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 23 of 2003 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Miryalaguda.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner being an agent of the institutes, has nothing to do with the certificates issued by the college, and he has nothing to do with the offences alleged against him. He submits that since the offences alleged against him are said to have taken place in Miryalaguda, the office-in-charge of the police station, namely the Sub-Inspector or the Circle Inspector of Police, Miryalaguda, as the case may be, alone is competent to investigate the case and file charge sheet, and inasmuch as, in the instant case, the Sub- Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Nalgonda, who is not in-charge of the police station where the offences alleged against him have taken place has investigated the case and tiled charge sheet, the proceedings against him, have to be quashed both on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction and locus standi. In support of his contention that the Sub-Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Nalgonda, not being an officer in whose local jurisdiction the offence took place, and he not being an officer superior in rank to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nalgonda, could not have investigated the case and filed charge sheet, placed reliance on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in A.Omkar v. Commissioner of Police.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that for speedy disposal of cases relating to misappropriation, criminal breach of trust, cheating, and chit funds/finance etc., the Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda, opened Economic Offences Wing at the district level in the month of July, 2002, and by virtue of powers conferred on him under Section 36 Cr.P.C., he delegated the powers of investigation of this case to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Nalgonda, and to support such statement, she produced copy of the proceedings in C. No. 7/EOW/2002, dated 14.08.2002, issued by the Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda, delegating his powers of investigation under Section 36 Cr.P.C. to the Sub-inspector, Economic Offences Wing, Therefore, the investigation conducted by and charge sheet filed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Nalgonda, is valid. In support of this contention, she placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Smt. Beebijan and others v. Superintendent of Police.