D.VENKAT SWAMY Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case at hand, precisely, is that the petitioner, who is a Police Constable,was issued a Charge Memo dtd. 21/2/2009 alleging that while he was working at Veepanagandla Police Station and assigned the Court duties, he handed over the seized tractors to the accused (owners of the tractors), by colluding with the accused, without there being any permission of the competent authority;and further he deserted the Department by resorting to unauthorized absence for 21 days. In relation to the same offence, a case in Crime No.67 of 2008 for the offences under Ss. 406 and 409 read with 34 of IPC was also registered against the petitioner and two others; and after investigation charge sheet was filed, and the same was taken on file by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kollapur, as C.C.No.121 of 2009. After due trial, the learned Magistrate, vide Judgment dtd. 20/9/2010, acquitted the petitioner and others.

(2.) Heard Mr. C. Raja Sekhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner; and learned Government Pleader for Home. Perused the record.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions on the lines of writ affidavit, and contended that rejection of revision petition by the 3rd respondent, summarily by the impugned order dtd. 9/3/2016, is illegal and arbitrary. He relies on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in G.M. Tank vs. State of Gujarat ;Civil Appeal No.2582 of 2006 and Capt M. Paul Anthony vs. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd,(1999) 3 SCC 679 .