STATE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT HYDERABAD Vs. K VENKATESWARA RAO
LAWS(APH)-1972-9-10
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on September 01,1972

STATE (CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT), HYDERABAD Appellant
VERSUS
K.VENKATESWARA RAO Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This is an application by the State filed under section 561-A, Criminal Procedure Code, for stay of all further proceedings in O.P. No. 63 of 1971, on the file of the District Judge's Court, Guntur, pending disposal of C.C. No. 6 of 1971 on the fire of the Court of the Special Judge, for S.P.E. and A.C.B. Cases, Hyderabad.
(2.) In the affidavit filed in support of this application, it has been stated that the respondent herein was originally appointed as Assistant Inspector of Central Excise, on 17th February, 1944 and by April, 1968 he was working as Assistant Collector of Central Excise, that the total income of the respondent from his known sources of income during the period from 17th February, 1944 to 8th April, 1968 when his residence at Rajahmundry was searched, is Rs. 2,86,619, that after deducting maintenance expenditure during this period for his family etc., the respondent was having assets of the value of Rs. 2,03,615 that the assets of the respondents were thus disproportionate to his known sources of income to the extent of Rs.1,11,555 and the respondent could not satisfactorily explain for the said assets, that therefore a charge sheet was filed before the Special Judge, for S.P.E. and A.C.B. Cases, at Hyderabad for an offence under section 5 (2) read with secticn 5 (1) (e) cf the Prevention of the Corruption Act and the same is pending in C.C. No. 6 of 1971, that the prosecution cited as many as 107 witnesses and filed as many as 574 documents to prove the charge of disproportionate assets against the respondent, that after filing of the charge-sheet the State at the instance of C.B.I. invoking the provisions of Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944 (Ordinance XXXVIII of 1944) filed an application for attachment of the properties of the respondent, consisting 81 items of movable and immovable properties in O.P. No. 63 cf 1971 on the file of District Judge's Court, Guntur that the learned/District Judge was pleased to pass an order of ad interim attachment under section 4 of the said Ordinance on 30th, June, 1971 and issued notice to the respordent and other concerned parties) that the O.P. was posted for enquiry to 1st April, 1972, that the witnesses to be examined ard the documents, on which the prosecution relies in proof of the charge of dis-proportionate assets in C.C. No. 6 of 1971 and in the O.P. are the same that therefore the eviderce will have to be let in twice over if the inquiry in O.P. is allowed to carry on that the inquiry in the criminal case cannot speedily be concluded if the O.P. is allowed to carry on before the disposal of the criminal case, since the documents to be marked and the witnesses to be examined are all common, that if the criminal case against the respondent is disposed of there may not be any need for enquiry in the O.P. in view of the provisions contained in section 13 of the said Ordinance that any enquiry in O.P. will result in unnecessary hardship to the parties and waste of public money and lime and that therefore the further proceedings in O.P. No. 63 of 1971 on the file of the District Court, Guntur, may be stayed pending disposal of C.C. No. 6 of 1971.
(3.) On this application filed on 29th March, 1972 my learned brother Lakshmaiah, J., granted interim stay on 30th March, 1972. The respondent herein filed Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 1588 of 1972 to vacate the interim stay granted on 30th March, 1972. In the affidavit filed in support of this application, it has been stated that the material allegations made in the charge sheet are not correct and they do not represent the true state of affairs, that after the receipt of the notice under section 4, he appeared in the Court and filed his counter in August, 1971 ana asked for vacating the interim order and dismiss the O.P. that the District Judge, proceeded to investigate the respective merits in the case and the O.P. was posted to 1st April, 1972 for investigation, that finding that the allegations made in the O.P. do not bear out the investigation b/ the District Judje, the petitioner hied the present petition, that the petition is not maintainable either on law or on facts, that having obtained ex parte order of ad interim attachment, from the District Judge, the petitioner cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under section 561-A, Criminal Procedure Code, to preclude the respondent from exercising his right of showing cause and satisfying the District Judge that the properties in question were not procured by means of any offence and that they are not disproportionate to the known sources of income, that the course adopted by the petitioner is in manifest abuse of the process of the Court and is in utter disregard of the principles of natural justice, that the charge sheet was filed on 10th February, 1971 that he appeared on 11th March, 1971 and the case is still in thestage of S. 173 (4), Criminal Procedure Code, that the prosecution has not produced the original documents, but is proceeding in a leisurely fashion mainly for the purpose of harassing the respondent, that the contention of the petitioner that the witnesses are to be examined and the documents to be filed twice over is untenable, that if the petitioner seeks relief under the said Ordinance, the relief must stand the scrutiny required under that Ordinance that if the stay asked for is granted, it amounts to making the stay absolute under the said Ordinance by shutting out the procedure open to the respondent for getting the ad interim attachment vacated, that he has got good grounds for vacating the interim order and if he is precluded from showing cause against the ad interim order, he will be put to serious and irreparable loss and harrassment.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.