Telangana High Court
T.Jeevan Singh vs The State Of Telangana on 1 March, 2023
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.2069 OF 2023
O R D E R:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the petitioner/Accused to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.3910 of 2019 on the file of VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against him are under Section 341 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State. Perused the record.
3. On the basis of the complaint of the Sub-Inspector of Police of Langer House Police Station, Hyderabad, crime was registered against this petitioner for the offences under Sections 341 and 188 of the Indian Penal code. After investigation, charge sheet was filed for the said offences. It is alleged in the charge sheet that the petitioner was contesting as a M.L.A., Karwan Constituency; and that though he had obtained permission from the Returning Officer for rally, the petitioner failed to control the bike rally, resulting in inconvenience to the Public.
4. As per Section 341 of the IPC, whoever wrongfully restrains any person shall be punished with imprisonment. Wrongful Restraint is defined under Section 339 of the Indian Penal Code.
5. As per Section 339 of the IPC, whoever voluntarily obstructing any person to prevent that person from proceeding in any direction in which that person has a right to proceed is said to be wrongful restrained.
6. This Court in Kodela Siva Prasad and others v. Koritala Venkata Ramanaiah and another 1 held that obstruction in the free flow of traffic would not amount to wrongful restraint under Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code.
7. In the charge sheet except the Police Personnel who are on duty, no witnesses who were restricted in any manner from proceeding in any direction, were examined to infer commission of offence under Section 341 of the IPC. 1 2006 (3) ALT (Crl.) 49 (A.P.)
8. In view of the aforesaid reason, the offence alleged against the petitioner under Section 341 of the IPC is liable to be quashed.
9. As far as the offence alleged against the petitioner under Section 188 of the IPC is concerned;
Section 195 (1)(a) of Cr.P.C. reads as follows;
195. Prosecution for contempt of lawful authority of public servants, for offences against public justice and for offences relating to documents given in evidence.--(1) No Court shall take cognizance--
(a) (i) of any offence punishable under sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of the Indian Penal Code, (45 of 1860), except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate.
10. As per the aforesaid provision under Section 195(1)(a) of Cr.P.C. the Court is prohibited from taking cognizance of any offence unless complaint is filed by the concerned public servant.
11. In view of the aforesaid provision, the offence alleged against the petitioner under Section 188 of the IPC is liable to be quashed.
12. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.3910 of 2019 on the file of VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, are hereby quashed.
Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 01.03.2023 tk THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION No.2069 OF 2023 Dt. 01.03.2023 tk