Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sadhu Kamaraju Sadhu Kameswara Rao, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 3 November, 2020
Author: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4878 OF 2020
ORDER:-
This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quash of F.I.R in Crime No.681 of 2020 of Srikakulam Rural Police Station.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. On the report lodged by the 2nd respondent, who is the de facto complainant alleging that the petitioners herein, who are A-1 and A-2, along with other accused, on 21.09.2020, at about 10:00 A.M., have pulled away the pillars erected by him and also threatened the de facto complainant and his men with dire consequences and that they also abused them in the name of their caste and insulted them, a case in Crime No.681 of 2020 was registered against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 427, 506 r/w 34 IPC and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "S.C. and S.T. Act"). The said case is under investigation.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that it is not specifically stated in the F.I.R that the petitioners herein, A-1 and A-2, abused the de facto complainant or anyone in the name of their caste and insulted them. He would further submit that there are no specific allegations against these petitioners in the F.I.R that they have committed any offences punishable either under the S.C. and S.T. Act or under Sections 427 and 506 IPC and that the 2 petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He would submit that if the criminal proceedings are continued against the petitioners in the said facts and circumstances, it would amount to abuse of process of law and thereby prayed for quash of the criminal petition.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, while opposing the criminal petition, would submit that specific allegations are made against these petitioners regarding the offences committed by them under Section 427 IPC and under Section 506 IPC and as such it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the petitioners for the aforesaid offences. He would submit that the contents of the F.I.R prima facie show that the petitioners are guilty of commission of the said offences and as such this is not a fit case for quash of the F.I.R and thereby prayed for dismissal of the same.
6. A perusal of the contents of the F.I.R lodged by the 2nd respondent clearly discloses that specific allegations are made against the petitioners regarding commission of offences punishable under Section 427 IPC in pulling away the pillars at the land and also in committing the offence under Section 506 IPC. Therefore, it cannot be said that no allegation is made against these petitioners regarding commission of any offence as per the contents of the F.I.R as contended by the petitioners in this case. Although, names of only certain persons are furnished in the F.I.R stating that they have abused the de facto complainant in the name of caste and insulted him, a perusal of the F.I.R further shows that along with the said named persons, other persons also abused him in the name of his caste and insulted him. Whether these persons are among the said persons or not, is a matter to be 3 ascertained during the course of investigation. Therefore, considering these facts emanating from the F.I.R, this Court is of the considered view that there are absolutely no valid legal grounds warranting interference of this Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the F.I.R. As the F.I.R discloses commission of cognizable offence and as it requires investigation to find out the truth or otherwise of the allegations, this Court do not see any valid ground to interdict the investigation or to quash the F.I.R at this stage.
7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, as the offences registered against the petitioners are punishable with less than seven years period of imprisonment, the Investigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 41-A Cr.P.C.
____________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Date: 03-11-2020 AKN 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY CRIMINAL PETITION No.4878 OF 2020 Date: 03-11-2020 AKN