Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
JUVVADI SRIDEVI
Sampathi Shiva Kumar Reddy – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing of a petition under section 482 of cr.p.c. for quashing proceedings. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. summary of the allegations and facts surrounding the petitioners' apprehension and the cash seizure. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. prosecutor's argument emphasizing the validity of the complaint. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. court's findings on the lack of essential elements of bribery and procedural irregularities. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. final ruling to quash the proceedings. (Para 11) |
ORDER :
JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J.
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 6 to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.548 of 2024 on the file of XIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar registered for the offences punishable under Sections 188, 171(B) r/w 171(E) of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Section 123(1)(A) of the representation of the people act, 1951 (for short ‘RP Act’).
2. Heard Ms.Niharika Ture Rao, learned counsel representing Mr.N.Naveen Kumar, learned counsel for petitioners as well as Sri. M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State and perused the record
Prosecution under IPC 188 requires a complaint from the concerned public servant; allegations of bribery were unsubstantiated.
A valid written complaint by a competent public servant is mandatory to prosecute under IPC sections for disobedience or bribery during elections; failure to comply nullifies ongoing charges.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
