APHC010353232021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5425/2021 Between: 1. THATIPARTHI SASI KUMAR, S/O KRISHANAIAH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 2. THATIPARTHI VENKATESWARLU, S/O KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O METTU VILLAGE, CHITTAMURU MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH SHO, CHITTAMURU POLICE STATION, CHITTAMURU, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, REP BY ITS P.P, HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, , CHITTAMURU MANDAL, CHITTAMURU, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. P GANGA RAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.,’)/ Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the B.N.S.S.’) by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2, seeking to quash the proceedings against Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No.140 of 2020 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kota, SPSR Nellore District. 2. The Tahsildar of Chittamur Mandal (L.W.1), SPSR Nellore District, lodged a complaint before the Sub-Inspector of Police (L.W.7), Chittamur Police Station, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 188 and 447 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘the I.P.C.’). Pursuant thereto, investigation was undertaken and a charge sheet was laid before the learned Magistrate. 3. However, insofar as the offence under Section 188 of ‘the I.P.C.,’ is concerned, the statutory embargo contained in Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, squarely applies. The provision mandates that no Court shall take cognizance of an offence under Section 188 of ‘the I.P.C.,’ except upon a complaint in writing made by the public servant concerned, or by another public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. 4. In the case at hand, the Tahsildar, being the competent public servant, was required to institute a complaint before the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate in terms of Section 2(d) of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ read with Sections 190 and 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.’ The mere lodging of a report before the police, followed by 3 submission of a charge sheet, is procedurally impermissible and contrary to the statutory scheme. 5. Accordingly, the cognizance taken by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate in C.C. No.140 of 2021 is unsustainable in law and is liable to be set aside. 6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C. No.140 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate are hereby quashed. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 27.02.2026 JLSR