M R PANDU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners herein are A-3 and A-4 in C C No. 62l/87 on the file of the IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief are : The 1st petitioner (A-3) is the Excise Inspector while the 2nd petitonar (A-4) is the Excise Sub-Inspector, in connection with an offence under sec. 31 (a) of the Excise Act one Amar Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') along with others was arrested and taken to the Excise Office. In the Excise Office, it is alleged, the deceased was beat with hands resulting in chest-pain and consequential death. The police registered the crime and the Government through G O Ms No. 533, dated. 14-5-1986 informed the Inspector General of Police that no case was made out against the accused for prosecution under sec. 147 IPC. and accorded sanction to prosecute the petitioners only under sec. 323 IPC. On receipt of this G.O., the police filed a final report and referred the matter as non-cognizable since the offence under sec. 323 I P C is such. However, the Government without assigning any reason issued another G.O., (G O Ms No. 243 Revenue (X) Department, dt. 12-3-87) directing prosecution of the petitioners under sections 147 and 323 IPC. It is the validity of this G.O., that is challenged in these proceedings

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that once the Government has exercised the powers under sec. 197 Cr P C., and refused sanction to prosecute under Sec. 147 IPC, it has no power to withdraw the same and issue a fresh GO., according senction for prosecution under sec. 147 IPC. It is also submit ted that no fresh material was placed before the Government for entertaining review of the earlier order. The learned counsel contended that granting of or refusing sanction for prosecution is a judicial function and when once it is exercised the same cannot be reviewed without notice to the petitioners. Therefore the sanction order has to be quashed.