Telangana High Court
Baji Bujji Babu vs The State Of Telangana on 5 June, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.12189 of 2023
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the petitioner/accused No.2 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in FIR.No.06/RCO- KMM/2022 on the file of the ACB Police Station, Khammam Range, Khammam, for the alleged offence punishable under Section7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018) (for short 'Act, 2018').
2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent NO.2/de facto complainant who is the working President of Wyra Tank Fish Society, lodged a complaint stating that during second week of July, 2022, the FDO Wyra, Bujji Babu, called the Fish Society and informed that the fishing season got finished, as such, he instructed the members not to go for fishing by duly giving ten days grace time. However, he alleged that after 2 SKS,J Crl.P.No.12189 of 2023 about two days, one Mr.Murli, who worked in FDO Officer, Wyra, informed the respondent No.2 that he would have a conversation with the FDO, and that being so, on the very next day itself, the FDO Wyra, instructed the respondent No.2 to meet him at his office and demanded a bribe of Rs.1,00,000/- to enable his Society to continue fishing in off-season, upon which, after pursing him for a while, the respondent No.2 offered to pay an amount of Rs.30,000/- and ultimately, the said Mr.Murli, agreed for an amount of Rs.50,000/- and the said amount was paid to Mr.Murli through PhonePay. Therefore, the respondent No.2 filed the complaint and requested to take necessary action against Mr.Bujji Babu, FDO Wyra, and Mr.Murli, Fisheries Assistant, Wyra, Khammam.
3. On receipt of said complaint, the Police investigated the matter and on completion of investigation a charge sheet was filed against the petitioner/accused for the punishable under Section 7(a) of the Act, 2018. Aggrieved thereby, this Criminal Petition is filed.
3
SKS,J Crl.P.No.12189 of 2023
4. Heard Sri GL.Narsimha Rao, learned counsel for petitioner/accused, Sri S.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent No.1 - State, and Sri Sridhar Chikyala, learned Standing Counsel for ACB, appearing for respondent No.3. No representation on behalf of respondent No.2/de facto complainant.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner possesses a clean and developmental service record and has not received any memos or other negative proceedings against him in his entire service tenure. He contended that the antecedents of the respondent No.2 would reveal that he is an active member of ruling party and is having political touches with the help of which he attempted to implicate the petitioner in false case due to which the petitioner lost his job at the tale of his superannuation service. He further contended that the respondent NO.2 was unaware of the fact that the said Mr.Murli was employed on contract basis and the respondent NO.2 submerged into his words and agreed to pay the bribe of Rs.50,000/- 4
SKS,J Crl.P.No.12189 of 2023 and accordingly, transferred the said amount into the account of said Mr.Murli. Therefore, as there was a monetary transaction only between the respondent NO.2 and the said Mr.Murli, the learned counsel asserted that the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case. As such, prayed this Court to allow the Criminal Petition by quashing the proceedings against the petitioner.
6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, and learned Standing Counsel for ACB, appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 3 submitted that there are serious allegations against the petitioner with regard to the bribe taken for the purpose of facilitating fishing during off-season. Theyasserted that the allegations leveled against the petitioner/accused require full-fledged trial.Therefore, they prayed this Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.
7. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that the primary contention of petitioner/accused is that he is not involved in the bribe taken by one 5 SKS,J Crl.P.No.12189 of 2023 Mr.Murli, whereas, the contention of respondent NO.2 is that a bribe of Rs.50,000/- was paid in the PhonePay account of Mr.Murli but there was active involvement of petitioner as well in the said act of corruption. Perusal of the record would reveal that the learned Standing Counsel for ACB filed a copy of the statements recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., and the averments of the same would disclose that the petitioner being part of the said bribery could be placed as prime accused. That apart, the issue as to whether the petitioner/accused in collusion with Mr.Murli was part of the bribery can only be decided after full-fledged trial.
8. At this stage, it is imperative to note that to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the Court has to see whether the averments in the complaint would prima facie show that the offence as alleged by the Police constitutes.
6
SKS,J Crl.P.No.12189 of 2023
9. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Surendra Kori 1, paragraph No.14 reads as under:
"The High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not function as a Court of appeal or revision. This Court has, in several judgments, held that the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., though wide, has to be used sparingly, carefully and with caution. The High Court, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of wide magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material."
10. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case, and as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Surendra Kori (supra) this Court is of the view that there 1 (2012) 10 SCC 155 7 SKS,J Crl.P.No.12189 of 2023 are no merits in this Criminal Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date:05.06.2024 PT