SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
V.R.K. KRUPA SAGAR, J.
Chevireddy Bhaskar Reddy – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others – Respondents
Criminal Petition No. 9109 Of 2024
Decided On : 10-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Srinivasula Reddy Kommasani
For the Respondents: Public Prosecutor, Anand Kumar Kochiri.

The court ruled that an FIR can only be quashed if it does not disclose a prima facie case; allegations must be investigated unless manifestly false.

Headnote:(A) B.N.S.S. - Section 528 - Information Technology Act, 2000 - Section 67A - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 23(1) - Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Quashing of FIR - The petitioner sought to quash FIR No.58 of 2024 alleging false accusations against him regarding a minor's alleged rape, claiming mala fide intent and political motivations behind the FIR. The court emphasized that the FIR must disclose a prima facie case for proceeding. (Paras 1, 9, 12, 21, 24)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of FIR - The court noted that both the petitioner and the de facto complainant claimed the accusations were false, highlighting the need for a thorough investigation rather than quashing the FIR based on the current claims. (Paras 12, 21, 24)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a political figure, was accused in FIR No.58 of 2024 of spreading false information regarding a minor's alleged rape, which he claimed was politically motivated. The FIR was filed after the victim's family alleged harassment by political figures.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the FIR disclosed sufficient grounds for investigation and did not quash it, emphasizing the need for a proper inquiry into the allegations.

Issues: The main issues included whether the FIR disclosed a cognizable offence and the motivations behind its filing.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the FIR could not be quashed merely based on claims of falsehood without a proper investigation into the allegations.

Result: Criminal Petition dismissed.

ORDER :

(V.R.K. Krupa Sagar, J.)

This Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., is filed by the petitioner/accused No.2 seeking to quash Crime No.58 of 2024 of Yerravaripalem Police Station, Tirupati District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 352, 351(2), 196(1), 61(2), 353(1) and 72(2) read with 3(5) of BNS and Section 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 23(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(1)(z)(zc) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

2. Respondent No.1 is the State. Respondent No.2 is the de facto complainant.

3. Sri P.Veera Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel being assisted by Sri Srinivasula Reddy Kommasani, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted arguments. Sri M.Lakshmi Narayana, the learned Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State submitted oral arguments and filed written arguments. Sri Anand Kumar Kochiri, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted arguments.

4. To appreciate facts and circumstances out of which Crime No.58 of 2024 has arisen a certain mention about F.I.R.No.54 of 2024 is required.

5. A statement made by a girl aged 15 years studying 10th Class was reduced into writing at 12:30 P.M. on 05.11.2024. Upon that F.I.R.No.54 of 2024 was registered at Yerravaripalem Police Station, Tirupati District for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 123, 96, 74, 78, 351(2) and 79 of BNS and Section 11 read with Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘the POCSO Act’). The substance of the allegation was that while the girl was coming from school to her home at about 4:00 P.M. on 04.11.2024 two males wearing masks forcibly took her away into bushes and forcibly attempted to make her to consume certain powder mixed liquid and with a folding knife caused injuries on her body and one of them held her tight and another one tied a tali around her neck and kicked her in her stomach. At about 6:30 P.M. the parents of the victim girl, during their search for her, found her and enquired with her and took her to Government Hospital in Yellamanda Village. Thereafter the victim girl was shifted to Government Hospital, Tirupati.

6. In the above-referred incident that occurred on 04.11.2024 the alleged incident took place at 4:00 P.M. and she was rescued by her parents at 6:30 P.M. and was soon thereafter shifted to hospital. Recording of her statement took place at 12:30 P.M. on 05.11.2024 and F.I.R.No.54 of 2024 was registered at 14 hours/2 P.M. on 05.11.2024.

7. After the girl was admitted into hospital and before her statement was recorded and was registered as F.I.R., certain events took place which gave rise to registration of F.I.R.No.58 of 2024 with which we are now concerned with.

8. The father of the victim girl is the de facto complainant in F.I.R.No.58 of 2024. As per the contents of this written information of the de facto complainant, the alleged crime incident in F.I.R.No.58 of 2024 took place while the victim girl and her parents were in hospital on 04.11.2024. Since in the present case the petitioner seeks to quash this case against him there is a need to extract the F.I.R. The written information is printed in Telugu language. It bears the date 23.11.2024. It was registered as F.I.R.No.58 of 2024 at 7:00 P.M. English translation of this F.I.R. is filed with the bail petition and the same reads as below:

    “To

    The SHO.

    Yerravaripalem Police Station.

    Tirupati District.

    Sub: Complaint against YSRCP political party, their daily newspaper and social media accounts, for damaging our family honor and future of our daughter by spreading false propaganda that our minor daughter was raped on 04-11-2024.

    Sir,

    My name is Gollapalli Ramana @ Ramanaiah, age 48 years. S/o.late G. Mallaiah, R/o.Kothamadigapalli (v). Yelamanda Panchayat, Yerravaripalem Mandal, Tirupati District, Ph.9550770146. I am cultivation and eking out my liveli

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top