Non-compliance with mandatory search procedures under the A.P. Excise Act vitiates criminal proceedings, constituting an abuse of process.

Order :

(V. SUJATHA, J.)

This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “Cr.P.C.”) seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner/A.3 in Crime No.188 of 2021 registered on the file of Chinthalapudi Police Station, West Godavari District, for the offences punishable under Section 34 (a) of the A.P. Excise Act , 1968.

2. The petitioner herein is A.3. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Vetapalem registered a case in Crime No.188 of 2021 for the offence punishable under Section 188, 269, 270, 271 IPC and Section 34 (a) of the A.P. Excise Act , 1968, against the petitioner and others basing on the mediator’s report. As per the mediator’s report, on 31.05.2021, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Chintalapudi Police Station, on receipt of credible information about illegal transportation of liquor, after securing the mediators, proceeded to vacant shed beside new bus stand, Chintalapudi and found that there are liquor bottles 1.Blenders Pride 750 ml-12 bottles 2. Royal Stag-750 ml-4 bottles and 3.Mansion House 750 ml-1 bottle and the liquor bottles belongs to Telangana State and on enquiry they came to know that the shed belongs to the petitioner/accused No.1 herein and seized the bottles under the cover of mediator’s report. Basing on the said mediator’s report, the present crime has been registered against the petitioner/A.1.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, among other things, mainly challenges the validity of criminal proceedings launched against the petitioner on the ground of non-compliance with the procedure contemplated under Section 55 of the A.P. Excise Act , 1968. He submits that before conducting search, the respondent- police ought to have obtained warrant as per Section 54 of the A.P. Excise Act , 1968 or otherwise, ought to have followed the procedure contemplated under Section 55 of the A.P. Excise Act , 1968, which the complainant-police did not do so. He further submits that the failure on the part of the respondent-police in following the procedure contemplated under the provisions of Section 55 of the Act, which is mandatory in nature, vitiates the entire proceedings against the petitioner. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a decision reported in K.L. Subbayya v. State of Karnataka, [1(1979) 2 SCC 115] , to contend that non-compliance with the provisions of Section 54 of the A.P. Excise Act , before proceeding to conduct a search by an officer and without prior recording of the grounds for his belief that an offence under the Act is likely or being committed, renders the entire search without jurisdiction and as a corollary, it vitiates the launching of criminal proceedings and on that ground alone, he prays for quashing the proceedings initiated against the petitioner/A.1.

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents, would contend that on reliable information about illegal possession of liquor and the Sub-Inspector of Police, conducted raid and seized the material, and therefore, the police followed the procedure as contemplated under law and there are no circumstances to quash the proceedings as prayed for.

6. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, the point that arises for consideration is:

“Whether the proceedings initiated against the petitioner/A.1 in Crime No.312 of 2021 on the file of Chintalapudi Police Station, West Godavari District, are liable to be quashed by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.?”

7. Section 482 of Cr.P.C saves the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Code or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice