IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2337 of 2007 DATE:08.06.2010 Between: Kodiboyina Appalaraju and others. …… Petitioners/Accused. And: State of A.P. rep. By Public Prosecutor and Another. …..Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2337 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioners 1 to 6/A-1 to A-6 are accused of offence punishable under Section 324/34 I.P.C in Crime No.24/2007 of Payakaraopet Police Station, Visakhapatnam. It is alleged that due to civil disputes between the parties when the 2nd respondent/defacto- complainant was constructing his house in his site, A-1 to A-6 came to them and beat the 2nd respondent’s sister-in-law with stones and caused injuries to her on 31.01.2007 at about 8.00 P.M. Admittedly there is civil dispute between the parties and it is evidenced by subsequent suit in O.S. No.40 of 2007 filed by A-6 against the 2nd respondent and others in Principal Junior Civil Judge Court, Yelamanchili. Simply because there is civil dispute between the parties, one of the parties cannot indulge in high handed criminal activity by causing injuries to a lady by beating her with stones. Existence of civil dispute is no valid defence for this criminal case. 2) It is further contended by the petitioners’ counsel that report given by the 2nd respondent to the police is vague in as much as no specific overt acts were mentioned as against each of the accused. It is well settled that F.I.R is not ‘be all and end all’ of the prosecution case. It is no encyclopaedia to contain all details. It is for the investigating officer to elicit the required information during investigation while recording statements of the injured and witnesses under Section 161(3) Cr.P.C. It is no ground for quashing F.I.R at its threshold. 3) Hence, the petition is dismissed. _______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J June 8, 2010 KSH