Machikatla Rajitha vs. The State Of Telangana

Facts

The petitioners, Machikatla Rajitha (Assistant Commercial Tax Officer) and Thota Anitha (Junior Assistant), working in the Sales Tax and Commercial Tax departments, filed a criminal petition seeking to quash proceedings against them in C.C. No. 1882 of 2024. The proceedings were initiated based on allegations that they demanded a bribe of Rs. 20,000 from the de facto complainant, Cheekoti Mahesh, a Kirana shop owner, after intercepting his auto trolley. The complainant alleged he paid Rs. 6,000 and was threatened with a case if he didn't pay the remaining amount. The alleged date of the offense was April 5, 2024, with the FIR registered on April 8, 2024. The petitioners claimed they were on duty attending a Dealer Awareness Programme on March 5, 2024, and presented attendance records and proceedings to support their alibi. They argued that the allegations were false and would affect their reputation.

Held

The Court held that the plea of alibi, even if supported by documentary evidence like attendance registers and programme proceedings, cannot be a ground for quashing criminal proceedings at this stage. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in Harjinder Singh v. The State of Punjab and Another, the Court emphasized that an alibi is a matter of defense to be established during the trial and not at the summoning stage. The Court noted that untested documentary evidence cannot be treated as conclusive at the summoning stage. Therefore, the Court found that the petitioners' plea of alibi could not be a ground to quash the proceedings. However, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the matter by dispensing with the personal attendance of the petitioners before the trial court, provided they are represented by a counsel on every date of hearing and appear when required. The Court did not decide on the merits of the allegations themselves, leaving that to the trial court.

Key Issues

1. Whether the proceedings in C.C. No. 1882 of 2024, initiated under Section 384 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, can be quashed against the petitioners (Accused Nos. 1 & 2) on the grounds of false allegations and a plea of alibi? (Question of law and fact) Petitioner's Arguments: - The petitioners, being government officials, never demanded any amount from the de facto complainant and were attending their official duties on the alleged date of the offense. - The allegations are false and detrimental to their reputation. - There is a delay in lodging the FIR (registered April 8, 2024, for an alleged offense on April 5, 2024). - Witness statements were recorded on March 5, 2024, which predates the alleged offense, indicating the complaint is false. - The petitioners presented attendance records and proceedings showing they attended a Dealer Awareness Programme on March 5, 2024, establishing their alibi. Revenue/State's Arguments: - Delay in lodging the FIR is not a ground for quashing proceedings. - When a charge sheet is filed, it is for the trial court to decide the case. - Ample material has been collected by the prosecution.