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.
SKS,J
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
SKS,J
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."
(2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 155
SKS,J
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
