Telangana High Court
CRLP/16402/2014 of Jangala Raghavendra Vs The State of A.P., on 30 December 2014
SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY CRIMINAL PETITION No.16402 of 2014 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/Accused in Crime No.297 of 2014 of Kurnool Taluq Police Station, Kurnool District, registered for the offence under
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARYCRIMINAL PETITION No.16402 of 2014
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash theproceedings against the petitioner/Accused in Crime No.297 of 2014of Kurnool Taluq Police Station, Kurnool District, registered for theoffence under Sections 354(B) and 509 IPC and 3(1)(x) of theScheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)Act, 1989.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedPublic Prosecutor.
A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioner is the soleaccused and the second respondent is the de facto complainant.Asper the allegations made in the complaint, on 29.09.2014 the petitionerintentionally insulted the second respondent in the name of her caste.The second respondent lodged a complaint on 17.10.2014.Thecontention of the petitioner is that the husband of the secondrespondent borrowed money from the petitioner and in order to avoidpayment of money to the petitioner, the second respondent foisted afalse case.All these aspects will come to light during the course ofinvestigation only.
While deciding the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Courthas to take into consideration the allegations made in the complaintonly.The Court is not justified in embarking upon an enquiry toascertain the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations made in thecomplaint at the initial stage of the investigation.The material placedbefore the Court is prima facie sufficient to investigate into the matter inorder to ascertain the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations madein the complaint.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case andalso the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in R.P.Kapoor v.
[1][2]State of Punjaband State of Haryana v. Bhajanlal, I am of the viewthat it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings at the initial stage ofthe investigation.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that theconcerned Station House Officer may be directed not to arrest thepetitioner till completion of the investigation.
In view of the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court inArnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another[[3]], the Station HouseOfficer, Kurnool Taluq Police Station, Kurnool District, is herebydirected to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 41-ACr.P.C. in Crime No.297 of 2014.
With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in thisCriminal Petition shall stand closed.
_____________________
T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J
30.12.2014Rns
[2]AIR 1992 SC 604
[3]2014 (8) SCALE 250