Kallem Srinivas Goud v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY CRIMINAL PETITION No.4320 of 2017 ORDER:

This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/A.2 in Crime No.358 of 2016 on the file of the Station House Officer, Pahadishareef Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has nothing to do with the land dispute between A.1 and the second respondent. He further submitted that no specific overt acts were attributed against this petitioner; therefore, it is a fit case to quash the proceedings.

3.

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegations made in the complaint are prima facie constitute the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner. 4.

A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioner is accused No.2 and the second respondent is the de facto complainant in Crime No.358 of 2016.

5.

As per the allegations made in the complaint, on 11.08.2016 the petitioner along with A.1 abused and insulted the second respondent in the name of his caste. The alleged incident took place on 11.08.2016, whereas the complaint was lodged on 12.08.2016. There is a delay of one day in lodging the complaint.

Mere delay in lodging the complaint by itself is not a legally valid ground to quash the proceedings at this point of time. 6.

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. Whether the petitioner has committed the alleged offence or not will come to light during the course 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. 7.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principle enunciated in R.P.Kapoor v. State of Punjab1, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal2, V.Y.Jose v. State of Gurajat3 and Teeja Devi v. State of Rajasthan4, I am of the considered view that it is not a fit case to quash the criminal proceedings at the threshold.

8.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar5, the Station House Officer, Pahadishareef Police Station, Cyberabad, is hereby directed to 1 AIR 1960 SC 866 2 AIR 1992 SC 604 3 (2009) 3 SCC 78 4 2015 (1) ACR 564 (SC) 5 (2014) 8 SCC 273

follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 41A Cr.P.C. in Crime No.358 of 2016 so far as the petitioner/A.2 is concerned. 9.

With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. 10.

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

________________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J Date: 13.06.2017 Ivd