The prohibition under Section 195 of Cr.P.C. is for the Court taking cognizance of the offences mentioned in the said provision and does not restrict registration of FIR. The proceedings before the Election Tribunal questioning the correctness or otherwise of the election of the 1st petitioner and the Date of Birth Certificates of three children are also subject matter in the said case, it would not bar the Police from filing a charge sheet on the basis of a criminal complaint.

ORDER :

Criminal Petition No.6250 of 2019 was filed by the petitioners/A1 & A2, questioning the proceedings in C.C.No.477 of 2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Parkal, Warangal District, which was filed under Section 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120 (B) r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code. No interim orders were passed by this Court in the said petition. While the said application was pending, the petitioners filed Crl.P.No.6099 of 2021 for the very same relief.

2. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that the petitioners have colluded and produced false Date of Birth Certificates of their three children only to overcome the restriction imposed under Section 19(3) of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. The said provision disqualifies a person from contesting the elections to Panchayat Raj Bodies, if the third child is after one year of the commencement of the A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. The said Act came into force from 30.05.1994.

3. According to the prosecution, the first child of the accused was born on 08.11.1995, second child was born on 26.11.1997 and the third child was born on 08.08.1999. However, the date of birth certificates were obtained as 08.01.1992, 13.12.1993, 30.01.1995 in respect of their three children to overcome the restriction imposed for contesting the elections.

4. The Police initially registered the case under Section 193, 196 and 420 r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code. Having investigated into the case, the Police found that false Date of Birth Certificates were filed by the Accused, for which reason, they are liable for punishment under Section 465, 468, 471, 420 and 120 (B) r/w.34 of the Indian Penal code.

5. The learned Senior Counsel Sri V.Raghunath, appearing for the petitioners submits that there is a prohibition under Section 195 of Cr.P.C. from registering the offences punishable under Sections 193 to 195 of the Indian Penal code. Further, the election of the 1st petitioner was questioned by the 2nd respondent which is pending adjudication vide Election O.P.No.1/2019 before the District Court at Warangal on the very same issue. Since the question in the said proceedings is being adjudicated on the very same grounds, the criminal proceedings cannot continue. He further submits the defacto complaint filed petition vide IA.No.2131 of 2019 in Election OP.No.1 of 2019 before the Election Tribunal for receiving additional documents and the same was allowed. When the said order was questioned before this Court in CRP.No.3113 of 2019, this Court had set aside the order passed by the Elections Tribunal vide order dated 18.02.2020. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that since the proceedings are going on before the Election Tribunal, parallel criminal proceedings are nothing but abuse of process of the Court and liable to be quashed.

6. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners relied on the Judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Suppl.(1) SCC 335 and argued that where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide intention and maliciously instituted for wreaking vengeance, the proceedings have to be quashed.

7. He also relied on the Judgment of Honourable Supreme Court in Salib@Shalu@Salim v. State of U.P. and others in Crl.A.No.2344 of 2023 (arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.3152 of 2023), dt.08.08.2023, and argued that the Honourable Supreme court has enlarged the scope of the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and the Court is at liberty not only to confine to the allegations made in the complaint but also can look into the overall circumstances leading to the registration of the crime and the material collected during investigation.

8. On the other hand learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent would submit that the proceedings before the Election Tribunal have nothing to do with the criminal proceedings. If any acts make out a criminal offence and also gives rise to civil remedy, both can be proceeded wit