IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4002 OF 2012 Between:
P.D. Meena … Petitioner/Accused V/s.
The State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad & Anr. … Respondents/Complainant Counsel for Petitioner : Sri A.S. Samudrala Counsel for Respondents : Public Prosecutor for R-1 Sri B.Shiva Kumar for R-2 The court made the following : [order follows] HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4002 OF 2012 O R D E R :
This Criminal Petition is filed to quash proceedings in CC.No. 544 of 2011 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Godavarikhani, Karimnagar district.
2. Heard both sides.
3. Advocate for petitioner submitted that second respondent lodged a complaint with police on 19/11/2010 in respect of the same incident and police after investigation filed final report referring the case as ‘false’ and thereafter she filed a protest petition and the court took cognizance on the basis of protest petition. It is submitted that in the complaint dated 19/11/2010 nothing is mentioned against petitioner and also with regard to the presence of eye-witnesses and the complaint in the form of protest petition is a complete improvement with the earlier version of second respondent. It is submitted that husband of second respondent is a employee working in CISF since a report is given against him, as a counter-blast this complaint is given. It is submitted that there is no prima facie material for the alleged offence under section 504 and 509 of IPC therefore proceedings have to be quashed.
4. On the other hand, Advocate for first respondent submitted that already disciplinary action was initiated on the report of petitioner against husband of second respondent, therefore, the contention that this case is filed as a counter-blast cannot be accepted. It is further submitted that accused is a superior officer and according to his instructions he has a track record of similar instances of harassing constables and the family members of constables and these aspects have to be decided only during trial, at this stage, they cannot be decided. He further submitted that complainant is a wife of constable working under accused, normally no house wife will come forward to give such complaint affecting her character and in the complaint abusive words were clearly shown and the trial court only after recording sworn statements took cognizance and the correctness of the statement of complainant and the eye-witness can be appreciated only during trial, therfore, there are no grounds to quash proceedings. He further submitted that accused is absconding and N.B.W. is pending against him.
5. I have perused material papers filed along with quash petition.
6. The main objection of petitioner is that contents of protest petition a private complaint are differ and there is improvement from the earlier complaint given to police on 19/11/2010. But the objection with regard to improvement cannot be decided at this stage. Any improvement, contradictions or omissions are only matter of evidence which a trial court has to appreciate after recording evidence of both sides.
7. Further as seen from the complaint, serious allegations is made against accused and according to advocate for complainant the court below after recording sworn statement of complainant and one witness by name Smt.B. Pushpalatha took cognizance and the correctness of those statements cannot be decided at this stage, and only if trial is taken place truth of the incident would come out.
8. Considering these aspects, I am of the view that there are no grounds to quash proceedings. However, as CC is of the year 2011, trial court has to be directed to take up trial and dispose of it as expeditiously as possible preferably within eight months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, without being influenced by any of the observations made in this order.
9. With the above observation, this Criminal Petition is disposed of.
JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR.
23/06/2014
I s L
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4002 OF 2012 Circulation No. 149 Date:23/06/2014 Court Master: I s L Computer No. 20th Court Hall