Telangana High Court
Valluru Raja Poorna Chandra Rao vs The State Of Telangana And Another on 27 April, 2023
Bench: K.Surender
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9335 OF 2021
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by
petitioner/Accused seeking to quash the proceedings against him
in C.C.No.6161 of 2021 on the file of XVII Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad. The offences alleged
against the petitioner are under Sections 506 & 509 of the Indian
Penal Code.
2. Heard. Perused the record.
3. The Police Jubilee Hills received a complaint from the 2nd
respondent herein stating that this petitioner and one Srivalli
Kanumilli were married. Both families are friends. It was further
stated that Srivalli became pregnant and she wanted to stay with
her mother on account of the improper conduct of this petitioner
who was continuously abusing and insulting her. On 05.06.2020,
the petitioner and his wife Srivalli who was witness in the case
were quarrelling and the same was informed to the 2nd respondent
and another. The 2nd respondent and another went to the house of
the petitioner. At that time the petitioner/accused insulted 2nd
respondent stating that;
"Neevu Entha Nee Brathuku Entho Maku Telusu. Maa Bed
Room Vishayalu Meeru Enduku Matladataru. Nee 1 year
Koduku Chanipoyinaadu. Neevu mee Amma vallatho
Untunnav, Neevu naaku chebutava."
4. The English translation of the above Telugu version reads as
follows;
"I know your status and the person who you are. There
is no necessity to talk about what happened in my bed
room. Your one year old kid died and you are staying
with your parents. Your need not give me any
suggestion."
5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that to attract an offence under Section 509 of the Indian Penal
Code, there should have been deliberate act of insulting the
modesty of a woman by uttering words or gestures or exhibiting
any object intending that such acts would intrude upon the
privacy of such woman.
6. He relied upon the Judgments of honourable Supreme Court
in Eicher Tractor Limited v. Harihar Singh1; Kapil Agarwal
v. Sanjay Sharma2; and Jetking Infotrain Limited v. State of
U.P.3 and argued that complaint is nothing but a counterblast to
the proceedings initiated by the petitioner and continuance of
such proceedings will be nothing but an abuse of the process of
law.
7. He also relied on the Judgments of honourable Supreme
Court in Thermax Limited vs. KM Johny and others 4 and
Kishnan Singh v. Gurpal Singh and othrs 5 and argued that
delay and latches in filing complaint makes the complaint
inherently improbable.
8. He further relied upon the Judgment of honourable Supreme
Court in Kistaiah & others vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh
& others 6 wherein it was held that in the absence of ingredients
(2008) 16 SCC 763
(2021) 5 SCC 524
(2015) 11 SCC 730
(2011) 13 SCC 412
(2010) 8 SCC 775
MANU/TL/1302/2022
under Section 504 and 506 the continuation of proceedings would
be an abuse of process of law and ends of justice and requires that
proceedings to be quashed.
9. There are disputes amongst the spouses and also family.
From the utterances of this petitioner, the ingredients of Section
509 are not made out. In fact, in a fit of rage on account of
differences, the petitioner had uttered that the 2nd respondent was
not even competent to suggest him and was aggrieved by the fact
that his privacy was intruded upon by discussing his private time
in his bed room. The said utterances do not reflect any intention
on the part of the petitioner to outrage the modesty of the 2nd
respondent or intrude upon her privacy.
10. Further, the incident narrated would not attract the offence
under Section 506 of the IPC. To punish for the offence of
Criminal Intimidation one has to threaten another with an injury
to the person's reputation or property, to cause alarm to that
person or that it may cause such person to do any act which such
person is not legally bound to do amounts to criminal
intimidation.
11. None of the ingredients of either Section 506 or 509 are
made out in the peculiar facts of the present case.
12. Accordingly the Criminal Petition is allowed and the
proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.6161 of 2021 on the
file of XVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad,
are hereby quashed.
Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
_________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 27.03.2023
tk
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9335 OF 2021
Date: 27.03.2023
tk
