K PAKEERAIAH Vs. RANGANAYAKASWAMIVARI TEMPLE MACHILIPATNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two petitions to quash the proceedings in C.C. Nos. 160 of 1975 and 161 of 1975 on the file of the First Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Gudivada, a short but interesting question of perhaps of some importance is raised. The question is, whether the failure of the executive Officer of a temple to obtain prior approval of the Trustee to institute criminal proceedings as required under Section 27 (4) (e) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowment Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is fatal to the prosecution.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the petitions are these, The Executive Officer of Sri Ranganayakaswamivari Temple, Machilipatnam, filed complaints before the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate.Machilipatnam for an offence under section 409 I.P.C. against the accused K. Pakeeraiah, formerely Executive Officer of the said temple alleging that the accused had misappropriated the funds of the temple and was absconding. The Magistrate took cognizance of the cases. The accused filed a petition in the cases contending that the complainant, namely the Executive Officer failed to obtain the prior permission of the Trustee as required under clause (c) of sub-section (4) of section 27 of the Act and that the absence of such a permission was fatal to the prosecution of the accused. The learned Magistrate dismissed the petitions. Hence these two petitions by the accused under section 482 Cr.P.C.

(3.) The answer to the question raised must necessarily depend on the construction of the relevant provisions of the Act. Section 27 (4) (c) of the Act, which is relevant, reads as follows: