THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3408 of 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in S.C.Spl.No.137 of 2023 on the file of the learned VII Additional District and Sessions Judge for SC/ST and (POA) Act cases, Warangal, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 294-b, 427 read with

34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(s) of the SCs/STs (POA) Act.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 22.06.2023 at about 6.00 a.m., the complainant along with his friends went to the agricultural fields of Samala Papi Reddy, where a quarrel was taking place between Papi Reddy and his brother. While they stood on the road, Samala Surender Reddy and his mother Samala Soundaramma abused them in filthy caste- based language, kicked the tractor belonging to the complainant’s paternal uncle Kolepaka Bixapathi, removed the air from the engine tires, and further abused them. The complainant and his friends returned home in a depressed state and narrated the incident to their colony elder, Kolepaka Bixapathi, who admonished them for not informing him immediately.

3. Heard Sri Sanjeev Reddy Gillella, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 – State and Smt. Sahithi Sri Kavya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the complaint was false and fabricated, as the accused never abused the de facto complainant and that the dispute was only civil in nature relating to land and tractor parking, and due to old rivalry and family disputes over pathways, the complainant falsely implicated the petitioners. He further submitted that no incriminating material was found in the investigation and that the witnesses cited were only interested friends, so the provisions of the SC/ST (POA) Act were not attracted and that there was no intentional insult or caste- based abuse by the petitioners and the complaint was filed only to damage their reputation. He contended that the petitioners were respectable persons, active in politics and village welfare, and the false case was lodged to tarnish their image, extract money, and grab their land. Therefore, he prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners by allowing this criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for respondent No.2 opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are serious in nature. At this stage, quashing of proceedings against the petitioners does not arise. Therefore, they prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, the main contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there are no specific allegations against the petitioners, and the matter is purely civil in nature, as such, he is entitled for quashing of the proceedings against them.

7. At this stage, it is imperative to note that to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the Court has to see whether the averments in the complaint would prima facie show that the offence as alleged by the Police constitutes.

Further, while dealing with the petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the Court has to take into consideration the avermetns made in the complaint and the statements of the witnesses and if the averments made therein do not constitute any offence, as alleged against the accused persons, then the proceedings against the accused are liable to be quashed.

8. Furthermore, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Surendra Kori, (2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 155, wherein in paragraph No.14, reads as under:

“The High Court in exercise