HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1834 of 2008 CRIMINAL PETITION No.1835 of 2008 and CRIMINAL PETITION No.8644 of 2008 Date: November 17, 2011 CRIMINAL PETITION No.1834 of 2008: Between: G. Vinay Reddy … Petitioner And 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad, Through Sub-Inspector of Police, PS, Abids Road, Hyderabad & another. … Respondents * * * CRIMINAL PETITION No.1835 of 2008: Between; G. Vinay Reddy … Petitioner And 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad, Through Sub-Inspector of Police, PS, Abids Road, Hyderabad & another. … Respondents * * * CRIMINAL PETITION No.8644 of 2008: Between: G. Vinay Reddy … Petitioner And 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad, Through Sub-Inspector of Police, PS, Abids Road, Hyderabad & another. … Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1834 of 2008 CRIMINAL PETITION No.1835 of 2008 and CRIMINAL PETITION No.8644 of 2008 COMMON ORDER: These three criminal petitions are filed to quash proceedings in C.C. No.326 of 2007, C.C. No.952 of 2007 and C.C. No.1029 of 2007 on the file of II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, against the petitioner/accused. 2. The petitioner/accused is said to be the son of the land owner who is a neighbour of the premises occupied by IDBI Bank at Chapel Road, Hyderabad. The employees of the bank have given complaint against some acts of trespass and damage caused by the petitioner on different dates. The police, in all the three cases, have investigated into the case and recorded the statements of the material witnesses and on finding a prima facie case have laid charge sheet for the offences under Sections 448, 427 and 506 IPC. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the mother of the petitioner was the Dean of the Law College and as a neighbour there was lot of harassment from the management of the bank and she has also given complaints to the Human Rights Commission at Hyderabad, but no action was taken even though it was forwarded to the police and these three complaints have been initiated as a counterblast to the complaints given by the mother of the petitioner/accused in order to harass them. 4. Evidently, as can be seen from the material furnished by the petitioner, some representations are said to have been given to the Human Rights Commission at Hyderabad about the acts of the management of the bank. But however, no action seems to have been taken and no private action is also initiated by the mother of the petitioner/accused against the employees for the alleged criminal acts or the acts of harassment attributed to them. 5. As matter stands, the police have recorded the statements of the witnesses and found a prima facie case about the allegations made thereunder. At this stage when such statements are on record and that the investigation discloses triable offences, merely because a complaint was given to the Human Rights Commission and it was not taken into consideration is no ground to come to conclusion that the complaints are a counterblast to the complaint of the mother of the petitioner. It is a case where the statements of the witnesses have to be assessed after cross- examination and it cannot be said that there is no prima facie material to proceed with the case or that the investigation done by the police is mala fide. Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, it is not an action of rarest of rare cases where the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised for quashing of the proceedings. 6. There are no merits in these criminal petitions and are accordingly dismissed. ___________________________ N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO, J Date: November 17, 2011. BSB