SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(AP) 42

G.V.SEETHAPATHY
V. Prabhakar Chowdary – Appellant
Versus
Kanakam Ramesh – Respondent


Advocates appeared
Mr. K.Meheswara Rao, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Public Prosecutor, for the Respondent No.2.

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P .C. seeking to quash further proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No. 462 of 2006 on the file of the Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class, (Prohibition and Excise), Anantapur.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the first respondent, though served with notice. Perused the records.

3. On a complaint given by the first respondent herein, police registered a case in Cr.No. 54 of 2004 under Section 5 of A.P. Prevention of Disfigurement of Open Places and Prohibition of Obscene and Objectionable Poster and Advertisement Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act') against the petitioner and filed a charge sheet before the Magistrate for the above said offence and the same was taken cognizance in C.C.No. 462 of 2006.

4. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per Section 16 of the Act, no Court shall take cognizance of the offence under the Act except on a complaint filed by the District Collector or any Officer not below the rank of Mandai Revenue Officer, authorized by him.

5. Section 16 of the Act reads as follows:

"Section 16-cognizanceofoffence: No Court shall take cognizance of an





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top