ANAND REDDI Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter was referred to a Bench by our learned brother, Basi Reddy J., as it was thought that it raised an important question of law as to whether there was a conflict between Section 485-A which was inserted by Act XXVI of 1955 and Section 487 of the Code of Criminal procedure.

(2.) The question arises in the following circumstances. The petitioner was convicted by the First Class Magistrate, Vikarabad, under Section 485-A of the amended Criminal Procedure Code and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 10.00. This was confirmed in revision by the Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has approached this Court under Section 439, Criminal P. C.

(3.) It is argued in support of this petition that the offence punishable under Section 485-A, Criminal P. C., is identical with that made punishable under Section 174, I. P. C. and, by virtue of Section 195, Criminal P. C. an offence under Section 174, I. P. C., could not be taken cognizance of except on the complaint to writing of the public servant concerned or his superior. It is further maintained that inasmuch as under Section 487 (1), except as provided in Sections 480 and 485, Criminal P. C., no Judge of a Criminal Court or Magistrate, other than a Judge of a High Court, shall try any person for any offence referred to in Section 195, when such offence is committed before himself or in contempt of his authority and since there is no reference in that Section to Section 485-A, there is an irreconcilable conflict between the two sections and a lacuna in Section 487, Criminal P, C. In support of this contention reliance is placed on the A.I.R. commentary on Section 485-A which is in these words: "The offence described in Sub-section (1) of the Section is an offence falling under Section 174 of the Penal Code which is referred to in Section 195 (1) (a) of this Code. Except as provided in Sections 480 and 485 of the Code, Section 487 prohibits a Judge of a Criminal Court or a Magistrate, other than a Judge of a High Court, from trying a person for an offence referred to in Section 195 when the offence is committed inter alia in contempt of his authority. As the heading of Chapter 10 of the Penal Code shows, the offence under Section 174, Penal Code, is committed in contempt of the lawful authority of the public servant. Thus in order to give effect to the provisions of this Section an amendment of Section 487 by way of making this section an exception to that section was necessary. In the absence of such amendment this section, it is submitted, will remain a dead letter on the statute book." The commentary in the M. L. J. Publication of the Criminal Procedure Code is on the same lines.