Telangana High Court
P. Ghana Teja Rao vs The State Of Telangana on 16 April, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5537 of 2023
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the petitioner/accused No.1 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.1231 of 2022 on the file of the III Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad, for the alleged offences punishable under Section 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and Sections 130(1) and 177 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'Act, 1988').
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 06.02.2022 the respondent No.2 lodged a complaint stating that on 05.02.2022 at about 17:10 hours his father by name Mandal Ramesh was going from Erragadda towards Panjagutta on his two wheeler vehicle bearing No.AP12C8953 and when he reached near Ameerpet Metro Station, a four wheeler vehicle bearing No.AP21AR0375 (red color nano) came in rash and negligent manner and dashed the vehicle of his father due to which he fell down and sustained injuries. The surrounding 2 SKS,J Crl.P.No.5537 of 2023 people immediately arranged an ambulance and shifted him to NIMS Hospital, Panjagutta and informed the respondent No.2. Thereafter, when respondent No.2 rushed to the hospital, he was informed that his father sustained serious injury on head and due to blood clots, he went to coma.
3. On receipt of said complaint, the Police investigated the matter and on completion of investigation a charge sheet was filed, wherein, the petitioner was arrayed as accused No.1. Aggrieved thereby, this Criminal Petition is filed.
4. Heard Sri Nabi Rasool Baladur, learned counsel for petitioner/accused No.1, and Sri S.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent No.1 - State. No representation on behalf of respondent No.2.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case and that he is nowhere concerned with the alleged offence. He informed that the petitioner is pursuing graduation in Tapasya Degree College, at Kukatpally. He contended that the father of respondent No.2 came in high speed and hit the road wider 3 SKS,J Crl.P.No.5537 of 2023 and by that time the petitioner was taking u turn due to which the car hit the two wheeler from left side as a result of which the father of respondent No.2 fell down and later died. He further contended that after the incident the petitioner and his family members insisted to get the CCTV footage but the Police refused and the same clearly proves that the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case. Therefore, prayed this Court to allow the Criminal Petition by quashing the proceedings against the petitioner.
6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner and contended that the complaint averments disclose that there was negligence on the part of the petitioner and due to the said negligence and rash driving the father of respondent No.2 sustained severe injuries and later died due to the said injuries. Therefore, stating that the matter requires a detailed trial, prayed this Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.
7. At this stage, it is pertinent to note the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh 4 SKS,J Crl.P.No.5537 of 2023 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. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that while dealing with the petition filed under Section 482 of C.P.C., the Court has to take into consideration the averments made in the complaint and the averments recorded in the statements of the witnesses and if the averments made therein do not constitute any offence as 1 (2012) 10 SCC 155 5 SKS,J Crl.P.No.5537 of 2023 alleged against the accused persons, then the proceedings against the accused persons are liable to be quashed. In the case on hand, there is no other material placed on record except the complaint filed by respondent No.2. In such circumstances, the Court is inclined to consider the averments made in the complaint.
9. In the present case, though it is the specific contention of learned counsel for petitioner/accused No.1 that the father of respondent No.2 died due to his own negligence as the said two wheeler was in high speed, the averments of the complaint would reveal that the petitioner/accused No.1 was driving a four wheeler bearing No.AP21AR0375 (red color nano) and came in rash and negligent manner and ultimately dashed the two wheeler due to which the father of respondent No.2 fell down and sustained severe injuries and even after taking treatment, he died. It is noted that except the complaint, no other document or statement is filed, and the averments made in the complaint requires trial to elicit whether due to whose negligence the accident occurred. As such, at this stage, the question of quashing the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.1 does not arise. 6
SKS,J Crl.P.No.5537 of 2023
10. In view of the above, and as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Surendra Kori (supra) this Court is of the view that there are no merits in this Criminal Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date:16.04.2024 PT