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.

ORDER :

(V. SUJATHA, J.)

The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short “ Cr.P.C .”) seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners in Crime No.325 of 2019 on the file of Dowaleswaram Police Station, East Godavari District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354A, 506 read with 34 IPC and Section 3 (1)(w) (ii) 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 (for short “the Act”).

2. Accused Nos.4, 2 and 3 are the petitioners herein and the 2^nd respondent is the complainant.

3. The 2^ndrespondent lodged a report before the Dowlaeswaram Police Station, East Godavari District, alleging that after the complainant filed an SC, ST case against the accused persons, they threatened the complainant over phone for withdrawal of the case. On 24.10.2019, one A1-Ramakrishna made a Whatsapp call to the complainant and abused in filthy language and demanded to fulfill his sexual lust, and threatened to file a false case, if she refuses. On 25.10.2019, at about 10.00 a.m., while the complainant along with her two daughters and driver Siva Prasad were waiting on a road to go to Kakinada, A1-Ramakrishna, telephoned her and threatened that if she did not withdraw the case against the petitioners herein and accused No.1, he will commit suicide and abused her in filthy language by touching her caste name and thereby threatened her with dire consequences. Basing on the said complaint, the police registered a case in Crime No.325 of 2019 against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 354A, 506 read with 34 IPC and Section 3 (1)(w) (ii) 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 .

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners mainly submits that even if the allegations in the report are accepted to be true at their face value, no offence under Section 354 A, 506 and Section 3 (1) (w) (ii) 3 (2) (va) of the Act, is made out against the petitioners as the incident did not take place within public view. Further, the petitioners, who are arrayed as A.3 and A.4 respectively, belong to the Scheduled Caste “MALA” and thereby, no offence is made out against them. He further submits that for the purpose of extracting money, the 2^ndrespondent-complainant, taking advantage of her profession as advocate and her caste name, is in the habit of lodging false complaints, and extracting money from the innocent people. He further submits that earlier the 2^nd respondent lodged a false complaint against the petitioners in Crime No.192 of 2019 on the very same set of facts, against which the petitioners filed Criminal Petition No.6574 of 2019 wherein stay of all further proceedings was granted as such the 2^nd respondent bore grudge against the petitioners lodged the present crime with the similar set of facts and on that ground alone, the proceedings have to be set aside, and he prays for quashing the proceedings.

6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents, would contend that the issue as to whether the said incident took place within public view or not is a disputed question of fact and the same has to be investigated by the police. He submits that it is impermissible for the High Court to look into the documents filed along with the petition, as the acceptability of which is essentially a matter of trial and that this court cannot invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C . and stall the investigation at the threshold.

7. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, the point that arises for consideration is:

“Whether the proceedings initiated against the petitioners in Crime No.325 of 2019 on the file of Dowaleswaram