IMPORTANT POINT
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.

ORDER :

The instant petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[For short “Cr.P.C”] has been filed by the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 7, 11 and 12 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.122 of 2019 on the file of the Mannur Police Station, Rajampet Mandal, YSR Kadapa District, which was registered for the offences punishable under Section 323 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code[For short “I.P.C”], Section 3 (1) (r) (s) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989,[For short “the Act”] and Section 132(3) of the Representation of the People Act.

2. The allegations mentioned in the complaint, in brief, are as follows: a. On 11.04.2019 at 3.00 p.m., while Respondent No.2 was acting as a Polling Agent of YSR Congress Party and the polling was going on, petitioners herein along with other accused came to the polling booth and abused him in the name of his caste stating that “Emira Mala Naa Kodaka, inthamandi kamma vaalla madhyalo neevu agent ga nilabadathava, ninnu road meeda vesi narikithe evaru addam vastharu”. Saying so, they attacked him with rods. When Respondent No.2 raised cries, Respondent No.3 who came for his rescue and was beaten by the accused. As such, Respondent Nos.2 and 3 lodged a complaint before the Police and the same was registered as a case in Crime No.122 of 2019 for the above said offences.

Grounds Sought for Quashment

3. Aggrieved by the registration of the said crime, Petitioners herein filed the present petition for quashment of the proceedings against them on the following grounds:

a. All the petitioners are no way concerned with the incident and they were falsely implicated due to political rivalry. No such incident occurred as stated by the de facto complainant.

b. The alleged offence took place on 11.04.2019, but the case has been registered on 13.04.2019, which clearly establishes that a false case has been foisted against the petitioners.

c. The allegations mentioned in the complaint do not disclose any prima facie case against the petitioners.

Arguments Advanced at the Bar

4. Heard Sri K.Venugopal Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. D.Prasanna Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State/respondent No.1. Inspite of sufficient opportunity, learned counsel for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 did not turn up to submit arguments.

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 7, 11 and 12 would submit that a false case has been registered against the petitioners. He would point out that the de facto complainant submitted a report on 13.04.2019 at 12.00 p.m., saying that the incident occurred on 11.04.2019 at 3.00 p.m. while he was sitting as Polling Agent of YSR Congress Party at the polling booth. Learned counsel would thus stare that there is a delay of two days in giving report to the Police. He would further submit that Petitioners are no way concerned with the incident and no prima facie case is made out against the petitioners, and only due to political vengeance, the present complaint has been lodged. Therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners is an abuse of process of law.

6. Refuting the above contentions, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the contentions raised by the petitioners are touching the question of fact and that there are specific allegations against the petitioner. It is also stated that the Respondent No.2 was attacked by the petitioners while he was attending his work as a Polling Agent and he was abused in the name of his caste. It is thus stated that the matter needs investigation. There are absolutely no grounds to quash the case against the petitioners.

Point for Determination

7. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsels and on perusal of the material available on record, the point for determination that arises in this case is as follows: Whether there are any justifiable grounds for quashment of the proceedings against th