THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI CRIMINAL PETITION No.15569 OF 2024

O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short ‘BNSS’) by petitioner/accused to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.989 of 2024 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Jadcherla, Mahabubnagar District.

2. Heard Mr. K.L.N.Raghavendra Reddy, learned counsel representing Mr. Palle Srinivasa Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. Surepalli Prashanth, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent – State. Perused the material on record.

3. On the basis of complaint of respondent No.2 on 27.09.2022, FIR bearing No.597/2022 was registered at Jadcherla P.S. Charge sheet was filed against accused on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Jadcherla, Mahabubnagar District, on 02.09.2024 under Section 353 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’).

4. It is alleged in the complaint that a person by name Naresh was called to Police Station for enquiry on 27.09.2022 at 09:00 p.m. That when Naresh came to the Police Station for investigation/enquiry at 09:00 p.m., another person walked into Police Station and abused the police personnel present in the Police Station i.e., D.Ramesh, Head Constable No.228 and B.Narsimhulu, Police Constable No.1233 of Jadcherla Police Station. It is further averred in the complaint that petitioner was the person who barged into Police Station and abused the personnel in filthy language, picked up a quarrel and pushed B.Naraminhulu, Police Constable. Hence, the charge under Section 353 of IPC.

5. Investigating Officer recorded the statements of D.Ramesh, Head Constable and B.Narsimhulu, Police Constable. On a perusal of the complaint, statements recorded and contents of the charge sheet, it is apparent that all the contents are similar in nature.

6. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that it is a false case filed against petitioner to implicate him and that there is no iota of truth in the complaint lodged and the contents of complaint are baseless. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that contents of FIR and charge sheet are same and that charge sheet simply reproduced the contents of the complaint and that there is nothing new after the investigation. Learned counsel for petitioner relied on the judgment of Apex Court in Kailashben Mahendrabhai Patel v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2621

7. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent- State submitted that petitioner abused personnel in the Police Station and used physical force by pushing the Police Constable and hence, Section 353 of IPC is attracted. It is also submitted that interference is not necessitated and proceedings in C.C.No.989 of 2024 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Jadcherla, Mahabubnagar District, be allowed to go on.

8. Heard learned counsels, perused the record and considered the rival submissions.

9. FIR bearing No.597/2022 was registered on 27.09.2022 at Jadcherla P.S on the basis of complaint of respondent No.2. In the complaint dated 27.09.2022, it is stated that one person by name Naresh was called for investigation and that he was accompanied by the accused. That the person who accompanied asked the Police personnel as to why his father was called to the Police Station and pushed aside the complainant and abused in filthy language. Nothing more is forthcoming in the complaint. The similar statements are reflected in the statements recorded before the Police. Police recorded the statement of one D.Ramesh, a Head Constable bearing No.228 of Jadcherla Police Station and statement of B.Narasimhulu, Police Constable bearing batch No.1233. In the charge sheet, it is reflected that the accused along with his family members came to the Police Station and picked up a quarrel, abused in filthy language and pushed aside and thus, interfered in the legitimate duties. In the cha