BALI TELLAM NAIDU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER who is an accused in G. R. Case No. 35 of 1999 in the court of S.D.J.M., Parlakhemundi arising out of Parlakhemundi P. S, Case No. 10/99 where the major offence alleged is under sections 302/149, I. P. C. has prayed in this application under section 482, Cr. P. C. to quash the proceeding of the said G. R. case and to direct for an investigation of the murder of late K. Narasingha Murty (in short 'the deceased') by the Crime Branch or the Central Bureau of Investigation on the grounds that the local investigating agency being backed by pressure from the political rivals conducted a motivated investigation to rope in innocent person like the petitioner.

(2.) PARLAKHEMUNDI P. S. Case No. 10/99 was registered on the First Information Report lodged by the informant K. Parsuram reporting about killing of his father in the morninghours on 9 2 1999 by fifteen persons headed by the present petitioner. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that while he along with his father, namely, K. Narasingha Murty were going for cultivation work, his father with a pair of bullocks was walking ahead of him, There is a temple on that route and when his father approached near about the temple petitioner and the co accused persons who had concealed themselves in a near by cattle shed of one S. Sriraroulu emerged therefrom and the petitioner dealt the first blow i. e., an axe blow on the face of the deceased. On sustaining that injury deceased fell down and thereafter the other co accused persons who were holding sharp cutting weapons like axes and katis indiscriminately dealt blows all over the body and the informant alleged that at that time petitioner was instigating the co accused to kill the deceased.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner argued that petitioner, who is an old man aged about 60 years, is fairly a senior Advocate of Parlakhemundi Bar Association and was also deeply associated with the local social activities and therefore he had numerous political rivals. It is further argued that because of that background of the petitioner has been victimised notwithstanding the fact that petitioner is immobile since the month of November, 1998 because of suffering from 'foot drops' disease for which he is under constant treatment both atBerhampur as well as at Visakhapatnam. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that a man may lie but circumstances never belie and therefore the aforesaid circumstances of the petitioner suffering from the disease completely belie the prosecution case about his involvement in the crime. Under such circumstance, not only the G. R. case should be quashed but also to know the truth of the occurrence the matter should be got investigated by the Crime Branch of the State or by the Central Bureau of Investigation because the local investigating agency i. e., the police authorities are partial as against the petitioner.