##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:21201 APHC010206942022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3327]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3163 of 2022

Between:

Kota Chandrababu and another ...PETITIONERS/A1 and A2

AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh and another ...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioners/Accused:

1. RITHVIKA KOGANTI

Counsel for the Respondents/Complainant(S):

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Court made the following ORDER:

This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein/A1 and A2 to quash the proceedings in Crime No.82 of 2022 of Renigunta Police Station, Tirupati Urban district, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341

and 353 read with 34 IPC.

SRK, J

2 CrlP No.3163 of 2022 2026:APHC:21201

2. A case has been registered against the petitioners herein/A1 and A2 and another pursuant to a report lodged by 2^nd respondent/informant, who was working as Head Constable in Renigunta Police Station, alleging that on 17.04.2022, at about 11.40 AM, Janasena Party Leaders viz. A1 to A3 and their followers, staged Dharna on the road near RTC Bus Stand, Renigunta Town and Mandal and raised slogans against construction of shops at RTC Bus Stand and caused obstruction to passengers and vehicles from going towards Railway Station and Bus stand. It is further alleged that when the informant and his staff, who were on duty at that place, requested the accused to clear the Dharna for free flow of passengers, the accused are alleged to have acted highhandedly on him and his staff and

prevented them from discharging their legitimate duties.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, even accepting the entire allegations made against the petitioners herein are true, they do not, on the face of it, satisfy the essential elements required to constitute the alleged offences. Therefore, continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an

abuse of process of law.

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioners by restraining the police personnel from discharging their duties have committed the aforesaid offences and the veracity of the allegations has to be considered at the time of trial and the same cannot be gone into in this

petition.

SRK, J

5. Heard. Perused the record.

6. There cannot be any dispute that inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to prevent abuse of process of Court or to give effect to any order under the code or to secure the ends of justice. This Court is also conscious of the fact that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases and that the Court would not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the report. On this aspect, it is pertinent to refer to the judgment of the Hon‟ble Apex court in State of Haryana Vs.

Ch.Bhajanlal and ors., CrlP No.3163 of 2022 2026:APHC:21201, wherein the Apex Court held, “In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant

provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelized and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein

such power sh