Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 432 (AP)

Nadimpalli lakshmana Varma v. State of A. P.

2008-06-27

GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA

body2008
ORDER This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No. 134 of 2007 on the file of the Court of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tanuku, West Godavari District, arising out of Crime No.4 of 2007 of Undrajavaram Police Station, on the ground that Undrajavaram police station has no jurisdiction to investigate and file the charge sheet and also the Court of II Additional Magistrate of First Class, Tanuku has no territorial jurisdiction to proceed with the same, as the offence alleged to have taken place at Kasipadu village, Pentapadu Mandal, which is within the limits of Ganapavaram Police Station. 2. Heard Sri S.R. Sanku, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the 1st respondent and Sri C.S.N. Raju, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and perused the record. 3. It appears that based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant 2nd respondent herein, who is none other than the wife of the 1st petitioner herein, the Undrajavaram police registered a case in Crime No.4 of 2007 and after completion of investigation, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Undrajavaram police station filed the charge sheet against the petitioners herein for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 IPC which was taken on file by the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tanuku, as C.C.No.134 of 2007. 4. Sri S.R. Sanku, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that Satyavada village, where the de facto complainant is residing and from where she made complaint to the police, is within the limits of Undrajavaram Mandal and within the territorial jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tanuku. In fact, the offence alleged to have took place at Kasipadu village, Pentapadu Mandal, which is within the limits of Ganapavaram police station and within the territorial jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tadepalligudem. 5. Be that as it may, if Undrajavaram police said to have received the complaint made by the de facto complainant, they ought to have transferred the same to Ganapavaram police station, instead of investigating the case and filling the charge sheet, as it has no jurisdiction to investigate into the crime. Instead, they filed the charge sheet before the Court concerned as if the crime took place within their limits. Instead, they filed the charge sheet before the Court concerned as if the crime took place within their limits. Further, though Undrajavaram police investigated into the crime, they are not empowered to file charge sheet before the Court concerned inasmuch as they have no jurisdiction to entertain the said crime. 6. In view of the said controversy, this court directed the Additional Public Prosecutor to ascertain as to whether Kasipadu village comes within the limits of Ganapavaram police station, and also whether Ganapavaram police station comes within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tadepalligudem. On instructions, the Additional Public Prosecutor stated that Kasipadu village falls within the limits of Ganapavaram police station, which, in turn, falls within the territorial jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tadepalligudem. 7. Therefore, in the light of the said statement, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner has to be accepted and the charge sheet filed by the Undrajavaram police, pending on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tanuku, as C.C.No.134 of 2007, is hereby quashed and in turn, the Undrajavaram Police are hereby directed to transmit the entire investigation done by them to Ganapavaram police station, enabling them to file the charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tadepalligudem, which has the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the same. 8. With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.