Telangana High Court
Mateti Kumar vs The State Of Telangana on 24 April, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.6452 of 2022
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, seeking to quash the proceedings against him in S.C.No.366 of 2021 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge (SC/ST) Court, Karimnagar, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 384, 324 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/STs (POA) Act.
2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 eking out her livelihood by purchasing and selling scrap materials. It is stated that on 12.08.2021 at about 08:30 p.m., the petitioner came on his motorcycle and demanded Rs.20,000/- from respondent No.2 by abusing her in the name of her caste and the wheel of petitioner's motorcycle was ran over the left foot of respondent No.2. Based on the complaint, a case was registered vide Crime No.84 of 2021 before the Kamanpur Police Station, Peddapalli District and charge sheet was filed vide S.C.No.366 of 2021 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge (SC/ST) Court, Karimnagar.
2
SKS,J Crl.P.No.6452 of 2022
3. Heard Sri S. Ram Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri S. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner being reporter of reputed media organization covering the news of illegal activities of scrap business around Singareni Coal Mines as some persons are illegally trespassing into the Singareni mines and stealing the scrap from dump to gain easy money. He further submitted that respondent No.2 along with her husband threatened the petitioner not to telecast the said news in the news channel. Hence, he prayed to allow the Criminal Petition by quashing the proceedings against him.
5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State opposed the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that the case needs to go through trial for the alleged offences against the petitioner. Hence, prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.
6. In view of the rival submission made by both the counsel, this Court has perused the record. According to the petitioner, he is working as a reporter in Janam Shakthi news channel and was covering the news related to illegal activities of scrap business around singareni coal mines. It is pertinent to 3 SKS,J Crl.P.No.6452 of 2022 note that after using the machinery, the Singareni organization dump the same into scrap and the said scrap will be sold by issuing a tender notification. Respondent No.2 eking out her livelihood by selling the scrap materials. Whereas, the allegations against the petitioner are only under Section 384, 324 of IPC and also alleged that he abused respondent No.2 in the name of her caste. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that allegations levelled against the petitioner require a detailed trial in order to elicit true facts of the case.
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."1
(2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 155 4 SKS,J Crl.P.No.6452 of 2022
8. In view of the above discussion as well as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Surendra Kori (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.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As the case is of the year 2021, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible duly affording opportunity to the parties.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 24.04.2024 gms