Sri Chintakayala Ayyannapatrudu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1010 AP

 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

       MAIN CASE No:CRL.P.No.1257 of 2022

                   PROCEEDING SHEET

SL.     DATE                                 ORDER                          OFFICE
NO.                                                                          NOTE
      24.02.2022
                    DR, J


                            Heard the learned counsel appearing on
                    behalf of the petitioner and the learned Assistant
                    Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the
                    official respondents.

Based on the complaint given on 20.2.2022 by the defacto complainant, FIR.No.105 of 2022 was registered, against the petitioner, in Nallajerla Police Station of West Godavari District, under Sections 153a, 505(2), 506 IPC. The contents of the complaint are as follows:-

"We members and leaders of all parties, stay with brotherhood in our Nallajarla mandal. While this is like this, members of Telugu Desam Party have made N.T.R. statue innovation opposite to the check post in our Nallajarla Village on dt. 18.02.2022. On this occasion, while addressing people, Mr. Chinthakayala Ayyanna Patrudu, who attended as the Chief Guest, spoke evil against the Honourable Chief Minister Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy and defamed the Chief Minister with vulgar language like worst fellow, cheater, etc., also offended other Y.S.R.C.P. party leaders as he wish in his speech at about 8.00 p.m in the night. Hence, through his speech, caste conflicts among the parties arose in the village and wrath environment was created. Due to this, few party members of Telugu Desam Party attacked a YSRCP leader soon after the end of the meeting in Nallajarla. Hence, we request you to take necessary actions accordingly and legally."

According to the respondent No.2, it is only with an intention to cause inconvenience, criminal intimidation and hatred against the Hon'ble Chief Minister and to create hatred in the minds of the groups of people of Andhra Pradesh, they spoke in SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE such a way, which is unsafe during the Covid pandemic.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has specifically contended that the ingredients of the complaint do not attract Section 505(2) and 153(a) IPC and as such, the same should be examined whether those allegations would constitute the offences punishable under Section 505(2) or 153

(a) IPC. For the sake of appreciation, both the provisions are extracted below:-

[(2) Statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes.--Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement or report containing rumour or alarming news with intent to create or promote, or which is likely to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill- will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

[153A. Promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.

According to Section 505 IPC, it is manifest that there should be words to constitute an offence punishable under Section 505(2) IPC, and there must be two groups or clashes in between two castes religious or communities.

A perusal of the complaint in the instant

case would prima facie, make it clear that there

are no groups or classes and in the absence of two

groups, the question of mentioning of offence

punishable under Section 505(2) of IPC does not

arise. Also as per the observations of the Hon'ble

Apex Court in Bilal Ahmed Kaloo Vs. State of SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE A.P., wherein it is held that common ingredients in

both the offences under Section 153(a) and section

505(2) IPC is promoting feeling of enmity, hatred

or ill will between different religious, racial,

linguistic, regional groups, castes or communities.

Section 153-A IPC covers a case where a person

by 'words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by

visible representations" promotes or attempts to

promote such feeling. Under Section 505(2) IPC,

promotion of such feelings should have been done

by making and publishing or circulating any

statement or report containing rumour or alarming

news.

According to the observations of the Apex Court, it is very clear that even the above said two provisions would apply only in the cases where the feeling of enmity, hatred or ill will between different religious or racial or linguistic or regional groups or castes or communities should be involved. Merely instigating the feeling of a person or community or group without any reference to any other community or group cannot attract either of these two sections. Finally in the above said judgement, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that who has not done anything as against any religious, or racial or linguistic or regional groups or castes or communities cannot be held guilty of either of the offences under Sections 153(a) or 505(2) of IPC.

The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that in view of the observations in the above judgment, it cannot be concluded that the ingredients in the complaint do not attract either SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE Section 153(a) or Section 505(2) of IPC.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner stated that under similar circumstances, this Hon'ble Court in CRLP.No.5440 of 2021 and also in CRLP.No.2818 of 2021 has granted stay of further proceedings in pursuance of the FIRs registered therein for similar offences.

He further relied on Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Bilal Ahmed Kaloo Vs. State of A.P., wherein, it is observed as follows:-

" The result of the said discussion is that the appellant who has not done anything as against any religious, racial or linguistic or regional group or community cannot be held guilty of either the offence under Section 153-A or under 505(2) of IPC."

Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Bilal Ahmed Kaloo Vs. State of A.P., and also the Interim Orders granted by this Hon'ble Court under similar circumstances, there shall be stay of all further proceedings in FIR.No.105 of 2022 on the file of Nallajerla Police Station, West Godavari District, including arrest of the petitioner.

__________

D.RAMESH,J

PA.

 SL.   DATE   ORDER   OFFICE
NO.                   NOTE