IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY THE TWENTYFOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4103 OF 2012 Between:
Surada Raghavulu & Ors. … Petitioners/A1 to A3 V/s.
Bondada PurshottamYadav & Anr. … Respondents/Complainant Counsel for Petitioners : Sri A. Ravi Shankar Counsel for Respondents : Sri Abhinand Kumar Shavali for R- 1 Public Prosecutor for R-2 The court made the following : [order follows] HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 4103 OF 2012 O R D E R:
This Criminal Petition is filed to quash proceedings in CC.No.230 of 2011 on the file of Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sompeta, Srikakulam district for alleged offences under section 323, 341, 352 and 506 IPC.
2. Heard both sides.
3. Sri A. Ravi Shankar, Advocate for petitioners submitted that petitioners are police officials and in discharge of their duties only they have restrained the complainant and no offence has been committed by them. He further submitted that further investigation revealed that complainant was not even having driving licence at relevant point of time and the present complaint is only filed to harass these petitioners.
4. I have perused the complaint and sworn statements of complainant and witnesses recorded by the court. There are specific and serious allegations against the petitioners and the correctness of these allegations cannot be decided in a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. What has to be seen in 482 Cr.P.C.
petition is whether complainant and the material thereof disclose any commission of offence, if not the complaint is liable to be quashed. Here a reading of complaint and the sworn statements of the witnesses clearly attract some offences. Therefore, the contention that petitioners that they are falsely implicated cannot be decided at this stage. Since CC is of the year 2011 and as it is represented that police officers are now working at different places by directing trial court to expedite trial and dispose of it within stipulated time by dispensing with the presence of the petitioners, this criminal petition can be disposed of.
5. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of directing the court below to expedite trial in CC.No. 230 of 2011 on the file of Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sompeta and dispose of it as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order, by dispensing with the presence of petitioner for each and every adjournment. However, petitioners shall appear as and when the court below feels that their physical presence is necessary for any specific purpose. Petitioners are at liberty to raise all these grounds before trial court and the trial court shall consider the same without being influenced by dismissal of this criminal petition.
6. As a sequel, miscellaneous petition, if any, pending shall stand closed.
JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR .
24/07/2014
I s L
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4103 OF 2012 Circulation No. 8 3 Date: 24/07/2014 Court Master : I s L Computer No. 43