IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.
Dr. Rayapati (Maddipati) Sailaja - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others- Respondents
Criminal Petition No: 2494/2021
Decided On : 10-05-2024
Quashment - Criminal Proceedings - Cr.P.C Sections 482, IPC Sections 294, 506, SC/ST Act Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) - The court interpreted the necessity of public view for offences under the SC/ST Act and found no prima facie case against the accused, leading to the quashment of proceedings.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashment of criminal proceedings for alleged offences under IPC and SC/ST Act, claiming no insult was made in public view and that the complaint was filed with mala fide intent due to her activism.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations did not constitute an offence as they were not made in public view, and the complaint lacked specific details, indicating mala fides in the initiation of proceedings.
Issues: Whether there are justifiable grounds for quashing the proceedings against the petitioner in the registered case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that for offences under the SC/ST Act, the insult must occur in public view, which was absent in this case, thus warranting quashment of the proceedings.
Result: The Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the Petitioner are quashed.
ORDER :
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.
The instant petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[for short ‘Cr.P.C’] has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused seeking quashment of proceedings against him in Crime No.77 of 2021 on the file of Thulluru Police Station, Thulluru, Guntur District registered for the offences under Sections 294 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code[for short ‘IPC’] and Section 3 (1) (r) (s) and 3(2) (va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989[for short ‘the Act’].
2. Facts of the case, in epitome, are as follows:
b. As such, Respondent No.2 lodged a complaint with the Police, which was registered as a case in Crime No.77 of 2021 on the file of Thulluru Police Station, Guntur District for the alleged offences.
Grounds for quashment:
3. Being aggrieved by the registration of the said case, the Petitioner filed the present petition seeking quashment of the proceedings against her, on the following grounds:
b. The delay in making the present complaint would clearly show that the present case was foisted only to take vengeance against the Petitioner as she is actively participating in Amaravati Movement against the Government.
c. Even according to Respondent No.2, he was identified by the Petitioner as George and as such, the very foundation of this case is vitiated as Respondent No.2 does not belong to SC Community.
Arguments Advanced at the Bar
4. Heard Sri D.S.N.V.Prasad Babu, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Ms.D.Prasanna Lakshmi learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for State/Respondent Nos.1 and 3. Despite service of notice, none appeared for Respondent No.2.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner is the sole Accused and the offences that are alleged against the Petitioner are under Sections 294 and 506 IPC and Sections 3 (1) (r) (s) and 3 (2) (va) of the Act. It is stated that the alleged incident said to have occurred on 08.03.2021 at 4.00 p.m. It is pointed out that the allegations leveled against the Petitioner are very vague and there are no specific allegations against the Petitioner. The complaint would not reveal that the alleged offence occurred within public view. It is also submitted that the Petitioner was very active and in forefront in Amaravati agitation. It is also stated that several cases have been lodged against the Petitioner in Crime Nos.63 of 2021, dt.08.03.2021, 64 of 2021, dt.08.03.2021, 66 of 202
Insults under the SC/ST Act must occur in public view; absence of this element negates the offence.
The court quashed proceedings under the SC/ST Act due to lack of public view in the alleged incident, emphasizing the need for specific ingredients to establish the offence.
The court emphasized that criminal proceedings must be quashed if they lack prima facie evidence, preventing abuse of the judicial process.
The court quashed proceedings against petitioners as allegations did not constitute an offence under the SC/ST Act, emphasizing the need for prima facie grounds for prosecution.
The court emphasized that quashing proceedings requires compelling reasons, particularly when allegations are vague and unsupported by evidence.
The court quashed proceedings against petitioners as allegations did not constitute offences under IPC or SC/ST Act, emphasizing the necessity of prima facie grounds for prosecution.
The court quashed criminal proceedings against the accused, determining that the allegations were civil in nature and lacked prima facie evidence of criminal wrongdoing.
In exercise of power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., Court does not examine the correctness of allegations in a complaint except in exceptionally rare cases where it is patently clear that allegations ....
The court quashed proceedings against the accused due to lack of prima facie evidence and emphasized the need for compelling reasons to invoke inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.