Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sukamanchi Srinivasa Rao, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 27 January, 2020
Author: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Criminal Petition No.387 of 2020
Order:
This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C
seeking quash of FIR in Crime No.228/2019 of Lalapet Police
Station, Guntur Urban, Guntur District.
2. The petitioner is accused No.1 in the above Crime
No.228/2019 of Lalapet Police Station, Guntur Urban.
3. The de facto complainant lodged a report against the
petitioner and other accused stating that on 11-7-2019 at
about 04.00 or 05.00 p.m., when he has entered the fish
market complex for the purpose of begging and when he was
at the first floor and entered one shop bearing Nos.112 and
124 which is closed, the accused in the case along with some
unknown persons attacked him and abused him in the name
of his caste and insulted him in the name of his caste. When
he raised cries that the inmates of the said shopping complex
came there and immediately the assailants ran away.
4. On the basis of the report lodged by the de facto
complainant, Police registered a case for the offences
punishable under Sections 323 and 506 read with Section 34
of IPC and under Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989 [hereinafter called as "the SC/ST Act"].
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
as per the contents of the FIR, the offence took place in the
2
CMR, J.
crlp_387_2020 closed shop bearing Nos.112 and 124 and as such the allegation that the petitioner along with other accused abused and insulted the de facto complainant in the name of his caste is not within the public view and as such no such offence punishable under the SC/ST Act is constituted. Therefore, the FIR is liable to be quashed.
6. However, as can be seen from the contents of the FIR, there is a clear allegation that the petitioner along with other accused attacked the de facto complainant and beat him and threatened him, which clearly constitutes an offence punishable under Sections 323 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. Moreover, at this stage it cannot be decided whether the alleged abuse or insult has taken place within the public view or not, when the scene of offence is a public place, which is a fish market complex. The said material fact whether the said insult in the name of the caste has taken place within the public view or not, is the matter to be ascertained during the course of investigation. So, in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court do not see any valid ground to quash the FIR. There is no valid ground to admit the case for hearing. So, the petition is liable to be dismissed at the stage of admission.
7. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed, at the stage of admission. However, since the offences are not punishable with more than seven years period of imprisonment, the Investigating Officer is directed to follow the guidelines issued 3 CMR, J.
crlp_387_2020 by the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar1 and also the procedure contemplated under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the petitioner. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________________________ CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J.
27th January, 2020.
Ak
1 (2014) 8 SCC 273
4
CMR, J.
crlp_387_2020
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Criminal Petition No.387 of 2020 27th January, 2020.
5CMR, J.
crlp_387_2020 (Ak)