High Court for State of TelanganaCRLP/1240/2016dismissed

Bolla Bhulakshmi v. The State Of Telangana.,Rep,.Pp

2016-02-08T.Sunil Chowdary2 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY CRIMINAL PETITION No.1240 of 2016 ORDER:

This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/A.3 in Crime No.17 of 2016 on the file of the Station House Officer, Pattabhipuram Police Station, Guntur Urban, registered for the offences under Sections 307, 354, 448 and 143 read with 149 I.P.C.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State.

3. A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioner is accused No.3 and the second respondent is the de facto complainant in Crime No.17 of 2016.

4. As per the allegations made in the complaint, on 21.01.2016 at about 4:00 PM, the petitioner along with others entered into the house of the second respondent and beat him. It is further alleged that the petitioner, who is accused No.3, abused the second respondent and his wife in filthy language. It is also alleged that accused Nos.1 and 2 made an attempt to outrage the modesty of wife of the second respondent.

5. Whether the petitioners have committed the alleged offences or not will come to light during the course of investigation. While exercising the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court has to take into consideration the allegations made in the complaint only. The Court is not justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to probability, reliability or genuineness of the allegations made in the complaint at the initial stage of investigation. The material placed before the Court is prima facie sufficient to investigate into the matter in order to ascertain the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations made

in the complaint.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principle enunciated in R.P.Kapoor v. State of Punjab[1], State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal[2], V.Y.Jose v. State of Gurajat[3] and Teeja Devi v. State of Rajasthan[4], I am of the considered view that this is not a fit case to quash the criminal proceedings at the threshold.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that concerned Station House Officer may be directed not to arrest the petitioner till completion of the investigation.

8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to direct the Station House Officer, Pattabhipuram Police Station, Guntur Urban, not to arrest the petitioner/A.3 in Crime No.17 of 2016 till completion of the investigation.

9. With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

10. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

________________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J Date: 08.02.2016 Ivd [1] AIR 1960 SC 866 [2] AIR 1992 SC 604 [3] (2009) 3 SCC 78 [4] 2015 (1) ACR 564 (SC)