ORDER :

VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J.

1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/A.2 to A.5 and A.7 to A.20 in C.C. No.147 of 2024 on the file of the learned II Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 341 r/w 149, 188, 269, 270, 271 IPC and Section 51 of Disaster Management Act, 2005.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, on 01.05.2020 between 09.00 and 9.20 a.m., under the leadership of A.1 all the accused formed unlawful assembly and caused annoyance to the public tranquility by wrongful restraint on the road before Panchayat office of Duggirala village protesting to the delay in MGNREGS scheme by disobeying the prohibitory orders issued by the District Collector, West Godavari, Eluru and lock down orders issued by Government in order to prevent the Spread of Epidemic Covid-19, thereby the accused committed the offence.

3. Heard Ms.B.Pooja Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioners/A.2 to A.5 and A.7 to A.20 and Mrs. K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present crime due to political reasons and that the entire prosecution is a result of mala fide exercise of power by the investigating agency.

It is further submitted that the complaint does not disclose the identity of the petitioners and that the charge sheet is conspicuously silent as to how the petitioners was identified during the course of investigation. Learned counsel would submit that no witness has specifically stated about the participation of the petitioners in the alleged incident nor has any overt act been attributed to him.

Learned counsel would further submit that the investigation suffers from serious infirmities and contradictions. It is contended that the investigating officer mechanically proceeded with the investigation without collecting legally admissible evidence and that the entire investigation appears to be a mere table exercise. Learned counsel further submits that, the alleged identification of the petitioners during investigation is only an improvement over the original version given in the complaint.

It is further argued that except vague and omnibus allegations, there is absolutely no prima facie material against the petitioners. The essential ingredients constituting the offences punishable under Sections 341, 188, 269, 270, 271 IPC and Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act are absent insofar as the petitioners is concerned.

Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the case against Accused No.1 was already quashed in this crime by this Court vide Order dated 06.05.2026 in Crl.P.No.4021 of 2026 and the A.2 to A.5 and A.7 to A.20 is also on the same footing as of Accused No.1, as such, prayed to allow the criminal petition.

Learned counsel would submit that continuation of criminal proceedings in the absence of prima facie material amounts to abuse of process of Court and therefore the proceedings are liable to be quashed by exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

5. Per contra, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would contend that the investigation was conducted strictly in accordance with law and that the charge sheet was filed on the basis of material collected during investigation. It is submitted that there exists prima facie material showing the involvement of the petitioners in the alleged incident and that the allegations in the charge sheet disclose commission of cognizable offences.

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would further contend that the grounds urged by the petitioners involve disputed questions of fact and that this Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., cannot conduct a roving enquiry into the correctness or otherwise of the allegations. It is argued that con