U. Durga Prasad Rao, J. - (1.) In this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., petitioner/A1 seeks to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 378 of 2014 on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada. The factual matrix of the case is thus: a) A1 is the contesting candidate of Member of Parliament of Vijayawada Constituency from Telugu Desam Party (T.D. Party) during General Elections of 2014. A2 to A4 are his associates and sympathizers of T.D. Party. b) While so, on the night of 01.05.2014 at about 10 p.m. when the Sub -Inspector of Police of Sector -I, Governorpeta PS, Vijayawada along with staff was conducting patrolling, he found A2 and A3 along with gunny bag at Kesineni Cargo Godown situated at Namburi Gopala Rao Street, Hanumanpet and on suspicion when he enquired them, they revealed that they were vegetable vendors and they were working as election agents for A1 and A1 instructed them to distribute T.D. Party T shirts in their area, and they went to Kesineni Cargo Godown situated at Namburi Gopala Rao Street, Hanumanpet and secured T shirts in a gunny bag from A4 and came out for a vehicle to carry the gunny bag and in the meanwhile, the police came and caught them. They led the police to godown where A4 was present and after enquiring A4 the police recovered around 2860 T shirts packed in seven bags each containing about 400 T shirts. On examination they found that the T shirts were in yellow colour which was the colour of T.D. Party and with the pictures of A1, N.T. Rama Rao, Nara Chandra Babu Naidu and also cycle symbol. The accused confessed that those T shirts were meant to distribute to voters to influence them to vote for A1. The S.I. seized the T shirts and submitted a "report to the Magistrate who in turn accepted it as a charge sheet and registered C.C. No. 378 of 2014.
(2.) a) Denying the allegations, learned counsel for petitioner/A1 argued that T shirts and other articles like caps, towels, kanduvas, kurtas, cross banners, wrist bands etc. are only election material and intended to be distributed to the party workers for making election propaganda and hence such material cannot be treated as bribe to woo the voters. He submitted that even assuming that A1 intended to distribute the T shirts to the voters to woo them, none of the voters would accept those T shirts as bribe and wear them for the reason that those T shirts are vividly imprinted with photos of political leaders and party symbol and further they are in the yellow colour i.e. the colour of T.D. Party. The recipients of those T shirts feel shy to wear them in public and therefore, those T shirts shall not be regarded as bribe to capture votes from the voters. On this main plank of argument, learned counsel sought for quashment of proceedings. b) Secondly, he argued that the same S.I. who is said to have conducted investigation laid charge sheet which is legally impermissible. He thus prayed to allow the petition.
(3.) In oppugnation, learned Public Prosecutor argued that the police have recovered large number i.e. 2860 T shirts from the godown of A1 and by no means such huge number of T shirts can be said to be intended to distribute to the party workers. The accused have clearly confessed that those T shirts were intended to be distributed to the voters to capture the votes and hence the act of accused clearly constitutes an offence under Section 171 -E IPC. He further argued that merely because the T shirts containing political leaders and party logo and they were in the colour of T.D. Party, it cannot be said that voters will not accept them. He thus prayed to dismiss the petition.;