R MEERIAH Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three petitions arise out of P.R.C. No. 7 of 1976 pending on the file of the learned 6th Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. In that case there are as many as nine accused. Accused Nos.9, 7 and 8 had filed Criminal Mis. Petition No. 2726 of 1976, Crl.Mis.P. No. 120 of 1977 and Crl.Mis.P. No.141 of 1977 for quashing the proceedings against them. I have decided those petitions by a common judgment on 16th February, 1977. The facts of the case have been stated in that judgment. It is therefore not necessary for me to reproduce in this judgment the facts of the case. The facts stated therein shall be read in this judgment as if they are incorporated herein.

(2.) Accused 5 in that case has filed Crl. Mis.P. No. 2755 of 1976. He was accused No. 30 in the complaint filed in Ghirala Court. At the time of the alleged offence he was the Inspector of Police, Crime Branch, C.I.D., since then he has been promoted to the post of a Deputy Superintendent of Police. He was connected with the investigation of the case relating to the murder of Dr. Krishna Rao. The complainant seeks to prosecute him for having committed offences under sections 120-B, 120-B read with sections 201 and 120-B read with section 500, Indian Penal Code. He is alleged to have committed these offences while investigating the case arising out of the murder of Dr. Krishna Rao.

(3.) Two contentions have been raised on behalf of tne petitioner herein. The first contention is that the learned Magistrate was in error in taking cognizance of the offence against him without the sanction of the State Government under section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The second contention which has been raised is that under section 53 of the Madras District Police Act 1859, which applies to the Andhra Area of the Andhra Pradesh State the complaint filed against him at Hyderabad was barred by time.