A RAMACHANDER RAO Vs. M KRISHNIAH
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) An enquiry against the petitioners 1, 2 and 3, who are Sub-Inspectors
of Police, Police Head Constable, and
Police Constable, respectively, of Wanaparthy
police station, was being held in
P.R.C. No. 1 of 1970 for offences under
sections 218, 220 and 342 read with
section 108, Indian Penal Code.
(2.) According to the prosecution, the
offence is alleged to have been committed on 17th July, 1969 at 6-00 A. M.
The complaint was filed on 3rd February,
1970. An objection was raised in the
said P. R. C. Proceedings that section
31 of the Hyderabad District Police
Act is a bar to the filing of a complaint
after 3 months of the alleged commission
of the offence. The learned Judicial First
Class Magistrate, Wanaparthy by his
order dated 4th August, 1970, rejected
the contention having regard to the
decision of the Supreme Court in Maulud
Ahmad v. State of Uttar Pradesh (Subba
Rao, J.). The accused carried the
matter in revision before the learned
Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar who by
his order dated 23rd September, 1970
in Cr.R.P. No. 13 of 1970 dismissed the
(3.) In this revision petition, Mr. B.
Madhava Reddy, learned Counsel for
the petitioners contended that both the
Courts below erred in applying the decision in State of Andhra Pradesh v. Venugopal
(Das Gupta, J),which was a decision based upon the interpretation of
section 53 of the Madras Police Act to
the present case in which an objection is
raised having regard to section 31 of the
Hyderabad District Police Act (hereinafter referred to as the Hyderabad Act)
read with sections 16 and 19 of the District
Police Act and 151, Criminal Procedure Code.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.