Telangana High Court
Keerthi Suresh vs The State Of Telangana on 4 April, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.11616 of 2022
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.609 of 2018, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 332 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC').
2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2/de facto complainant lodged a complaint before the Police, Jangaon Police Station, Warangal District, against the petitioner stating that while he was attending his duty and calling the parties to the Court, three persons entered into the Court hall pertaining to C.C.No.367 of 2015. One of the them went near to Magistrate and argued with the Magistrate about his case. After the Bench Clerk was given next date of adjournment, respondent No.2 said them to go outside the Court hall and called another party, but the petitioner beat him on his cheek. Basing on the said complaint, the Police registered a case in Crime No.231 of 2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 332 and 228 of the IPC and 2 SKS,J Crl.P.No.11616 of 2022 after completion of investigation, they filed charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon, Warangal District.
3. Heard Smt. B. Rachana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner as well as Sri S. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State and Sri Alluri Divakar Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the incident was occurred in the Court hall and the concerned officer has to lodge the complaint, but it is not given by the officer. Further, the allegation against the petitioner is very vague, as such, prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against him.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the incident was occurred in the Court hall and the allegations clearly show that the petitioner committed an offence and since there are allegations against the petitioner, quashing of proceedings at this stage does not arise, as such, prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.
6. Having regard to the rival submissions made by both the learned counsel and having gone through the material available on record, to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, the 3 SKS,J Crl.P.No.11616 of 2022 Court has to see whether the averments in the complaint prima facie shows that it constitute the offence as alleged by the Police.
7. At this stage, it is pertinent to note the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Surendra Kori 1, wherein in paragraph No.14 it is held as follows:
"The High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not function as a Court of appeal or revision. This Court has, in several judgments, held that the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., though wide, has to be used sparingly, carefully and with caution. The High Court, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of wide magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material."
8. As seen from the record, it is to be noted that the petitioner slapped respondent No.2 without any reason and the said incident was occurred in the Court hall. The statement of witnesses and the averments in the complaint also reveal the same. Since there are allegations against the petitioner, which require trial, at this stage, it cannot be said that the allegations are baseless. 1 (2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 155 4 SKS,J Crl.P.No.11616 of 2022
9. In view of the above discussion as well as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh (supra), this Court does not find any merit in the criminal petition to quash the proceedings against the petitioner and the same is liable to be dismissed.
10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As the case is of the year 2018, the trial Court is directed to dispose of C.C.No.609 of 2018, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 04.04.2024 SAI