Telangana High Court

Mohammed Shadab vs The State Of Telangana on 28 November, 2023

Author: G. Radha Rani

Bench: G. Radha Rani

               THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI

             CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.11165 and 11166 of 2023

COMMON ORDER:

Criminal Petition No.11165 of 2023 is filed by the petitioners-accused

Nos. 7 and 9 under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short,

'Cr.P.C.') to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.784 of 2018 on the file of the

Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Armoor

wherein a charge sheet was filed against them for the offences under Sections

147, 148, 332, 324 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short,

'IPC') along with ten others.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief was that on 05.09.2017, a

person by name Barki Mukesh, who was accused in Crime No.120 of 2017 of

PS Nandipet under Section 295-A IPC uploaded a post in social media, face

book in which he morphed photo of Lord Hanuman idol on a mosque with

letters Jai Sri Ram. On knowing the same, about 100 persons belonging to

Muslim community gathered and formed themselves into an unlawful assembly

under the leadership of A1 to A21 and a juvenile in conflict with law with an

intention to attack the house of the suspect at about 8:10 P.M.. Immediately, the

local Hindu community persons about 60-70 members also gathered and formed

themselves into an unlawful assembly under the leadership of Sagar (A22) and

Bharath (A23) and others went to the house of the said suspect. On receipt of

Dr. GRR,J crlp_11165 and 11166_2023

the said information, the SI of PS Nandipet along with his staff rushed to the

spot at about 8:30 P.M. and commanded the unlawful assembly to disperse. The

assembly paid a deaf ear to police warnings and members of both the

communities pelted stones upon each other, resulting which the complainant-

police constable(102) sustained injuries to his right hand and police constable

(1796) sustained injuries to his head and leg. Basing on the said report, the SI of

PS Nandipet registered a case in vide Crime No.121 of 2017 for the offences

under Sections 147, 148, 332, 324 read with Section 149 of IPC and after

investigation filed charge sheet against A1 to A23 including the above

petitioners for the above offences.

3. Criminal Petition No.11166 of 2023 is filed by the petitioners-

accused Nos. 7 and 8 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in

C.C.No.175 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Armoor

wherein a charge sheet was filed against them for the offences under Sections

147, 148, 332, 324 read with Section 149 of IPC.

4. The case of the prosecution in brief was that on 05.09.2017, a

person by name, Barki Mukesh, who was accused in Crime No.120 of 2017

under Section 295-A IPC of PS Nandipet uploaded a post in social media, face

book in which he morphed photo of Lord Hanuman idol on a mosque with

letters Jai Sri Ram. The accused persons A1 to A21 and a juvenile in conflict

Dr. GRR,J crlp_11165 and 11166_2023

with law who belonged to the Muslim community felt insulted as the said Barki

Mukesh insulted their religious holy mosque by morphing photo of Lord

Hanuman idol on a mosque with letters Jai Sri Ram. As such, the accused

persons (including the petitioners herein) formed themselves into an unlawful

assembly and to take revenge and to assault Barki Mukesh and also to attack the

Hindu community persons gathered and formed themselves into an unlawful

assembly and went to the house of the said Barki Mukesh at about 8:15 P.M.

On knowing this, the Hindu community persons also went there and both the

religious groups pelted stones on each other. On knowing this, the Nandipet

Police rushed there and in the incident both the community persons sustained

injuries and the accused persons with angry mood that the police intervened into

the matter, pelted stones on police personnel and caused injuries, but the police

dispersed them. On 05.09.2017 at about 8:30 PM, as per the instructions of

ACP, Armoor, the complainant i.e., SI of Police, PS Velpoor along with staff

rushed from Armoor to Jama Masjid at Nandipet. At about 9:00 P.M., the police

party saw the accused persons about 100 in mob who by their clothes and

appearance looked like a Muslim mob armed with stones. The police team

commanded them to disperse immediately declaring the mob as an unlawful

assembly, but the accused persons paid deaf ear to the warnings of the police

party and indiscriminately pelted stones on the Police. The aggressive mob

pelted stones from roof tops aiming at the heads and faces of the police team

Dr. GRR,J crlp_11165 and 11166_2023

with an intention to cause fatal injuries. Due to pelting of stones, AR PC-381

sustained bleeding injuries to his leg. Basing on the said report, the SI of Police

of PS Nandipet registered a case vide Crime No.122 of 2017 under Sections 147,

148, 324, 332 read with Section 149 of IPC and after investigation filed charge

sheet against A1 to A21 (including the petitioners herein) for the above

offences.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S. Ganesh,

the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first

petitioner was an MBA graduate doing marketing job in a Hotel. He was well

placed and was doing well. On noticing the facebook page of Barki Mukesh, the

petitioner No.1 called him over phone and requested him to remove the

facebook page morphed Lord Hanuman idol from the mosque to avoid any kind

of disharmony in the society in and around the Armoor area. Thereafter, slowly

people of various communities started gathering in the open street. On sensing

some communal disharmony in the area, the petitioner No.1 immediately dialed

100 to police and informed about the morphing of lord Hanuman idol and

placing it on a mosque by one Barki Mukesh on the social media face book post

and requested the police to come over to the street to control the public from

taking the law and order into their hands. The respondent police quickly stepped

Dr. GRR,J crlp_11165 and 11166_2023

into the street and taken the law and order into control. They requested the

public to disperse and withdraw to their respective houses. Some of the persons

complied the request of the police. The petitioners also went away to their

houses. The petitioner No.2 was the brother of petitioner No.1. He was a driver

by profession. He was on duty with the owner of his vehicle. He was not at all

present at the scene of offence as alleged by the police in the charge sheets. The

respondent police instead of taking the petitioner No.1 as complainant made him

as accused. Similarly, though the petitioner No.2 was not at all present, he was

included as an accused. No overtacts were attributed against the petitioners

either in the complaint or in the charge sheet.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that with

regard to one incident alleged to have taken place in the night of 05.09.2017

between 8:00 P.M. and 9:00 P.M., police illegally registered three separate FIRs

against the very same accused persons charging with similar offences of creating

law and order problem and gathering of unlawful assembly. When a single

incident took place, multiple registration of FIRs was not permitted and relied

upon the judgment of the combined High Court of Andhra Pradesh in

Akbaruddin Owaisi Vs. The Government of Andhra Pradesh represented

by its Principal Secretary 1.

W.P.No.824 of 2013 dated 19.07.2013

Dr. GRR,J crlp_11165 and 11166_2023

8. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on the other hand contended

that the said three crimes were registered for three separate incidents occurred at

different places and at different times on 05.09.2017. All the FIRs were

regarding independent and distinct offences. Hence, registration of FIRs was

not prohibited under Cr.P.C.

9. Perused the record. The record would disclose that in Crime

No.121 of 2017, the date and time of incident was stated to be on 05.09.2017 at

8:10 PM and the incident was stated to be at the house of the suspect, Barki

Mukesh wherein it was alleged that two police personnel and some other

persons belonging to both the communities sustained injuries due to pelting of

stones by the members of both the community people on each other in which the

charge sheet was filed against 23 persons including the petitioners herein

showing them as accused Nos.7 and 9 for the offences under Sections 147, 148,

332, 324 read with Section 149 of IPC and numbered as C.C.No.784 of 2018.

10. The second incident was alleged to have taken place at 9:00 P.M.

on 05.09.2017 wherein it was alleged that after the incident at the house of the

suspect, the mob proceeded to Jama Masjid at Nandipet armed with stones and

even though the police team commanded them to disperse, pelted stones on the

police due to which one AR PC-381 was alleged to have sustained bleeding

injury to his leg for which a case in Crime No.122 of 2017 was registered and

Dr. GRR,J crlp_11165 and 11166_2023

charge sheet was filed against 21 accused persons including the petitioners

herein as A7 and A8 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 332, 324 read

with Section 149 of IPC.

11. It was also alleged that after the above two incidents on the same

date .e., on 05.09.2017 at 9:30 P.M., a mob of 100 persons armed with stones

gathered near the bus stand, Barkathpura Colony, Nandipet and even though the

police team directed them to disperse and declared them as unlawful assembly

had not dispersed and pelted stones from the roof tops aiming the police team

with an intention to cause injuries to them. Due to the stone pelting, one police

constable sustained grievous injuries to his mouth, nose and some other police

personnel were also injured, for which the Inspector of Police registered a case

in Crime No.123 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 332, 307

read with Section 149 of IPC which was registered as PRC.No.2 of 2019 and

committed to the Court of Sessions, numbered as S.C.No.52 of 2020 and tried

by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Armoor. The said case ended in acquittal of A1

to A21. The petitioners were shown as A7 and A8 in the said case. None of the

police personnel identified the accused persons as members of the unlawful

assembly or rioters or that they were responsible for causing injuries by pelting

stones on the police personnel.

Dr. GRR,J crlp_11165 and 11166_2023

12. He further submitted that the present two cases registered against

the petitioners were not so serious offences as the case tried against the

petitioners in S.C.No.52 of 2020. There is no possibility of securing conviction

in these cases also. He further submitted that the petitioners were regularly

attending the Court for the past more than five years till now. Trial was not

commenced by the Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Judicial Magistrate of

First Class, Armoor. The lives of the petitioners were completely ruined due to

the false cases registered against them without any overtacts attributed against

the petitioners. The petitioners were unable to attend to their avocations.

13. The learned counsel for the petitioners also relied upon the

judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Iqbal @ Bala & Ors. Vs. State of U.P.

& Ors. 2 wherein it was held that:

"10. At this stage, we would like to observe something important. Whenever an accused comes before the Court invoking either the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) or extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to get the FIR or the criminal proceedings quashed essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance, then in such circumstances the Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with care and a little more closely. We say so because once the complainant decides to

2023 (5) Supreme 497

Dr. GRR,J crlp_11165 and 11166_2023

proceed against the accused with an ulterior motive for wreaking personal vengeance, etc., then he would ensure that the FIR/complaint is very well drafted with all the necessary pleadings. The complainant would ensure that the averments made in the FIR/complaint are such that they disclose the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence. Therefore, it will not be just enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not. In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines. The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution need not restrict itself only to the stage of a case but is empowered to take into account the overall circumstances leading to the initiation/ registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation. Take for instance the case on hand. Multiple FIRs have been registered over a period of time. It is in the background of such circumstances the registration of multiple FIRs assumes importance, thereby attracting the issue of wreaking vengeance out of private or personal grudge as alleged."

14. Thus these were not cases of wreaking vengeance out of private

or personal grudge, but considering all the other attending circumstances

wherein three cases were registered one after the other within a time span of half

an hour gap in between them at three different places wherein the names of the

Dr. GRR,J crlp_11165 and 11166_2023

petitioners were cited as accused in all the above three cases and the most severe

case among them tried as S.C.No.52 of 2020 resulted in acquittal of all the

accused persons including the present petitioners herein due to lack of

identification of specific persons who pelted stones on the police personnel from

out of the mob of around 100 persons and the result of the present calendar cases

is also likely to be on the same lines resulting in waste of the precious time of

the Court and considering that the petitioners are moving around the Court for