HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10546 OF 2010 DATE: 27.10.2010 BETWEEN: Shaik Minnekallu Saida. - - - Petitioner/Accused. AND The State of A.P., Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad And another. - - - Respondents. This Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10546 OF 2010 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the Petitioner/Accused under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings in P.R.C. No.21 of 2010, on the file of the Court of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, Guntur District. Heard Sri S. Narendranath Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner/Accused and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the Respondents-State. While the second respondent-complainant was undergoing treatment for the injuries in the Area Government Hospital, Narasaraopet, the police examined her and recorded her statement. According to which, on 17-04-2010, the petitioner caught hold of the tuft of the de-facto complainant, dragged her on to the ground, sat on her chest and beat her indiscriminately. He also beat her with a stick on her left eye causing bleeding injury. A case was registered basing on the said statement for the offence under section 324 I.P.C. After completing the investigation, the police filed charge sheet into the Court of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, Guntur. While the said case was pending, due to the threat hurled by the de-facto complainant that unless the petitioner was arrested, she would die by consuming poison, the learned Magistrate added Sections 447 and 354 I.P.C. and converted the same into P.R.C. No.21 of 2010 and under these circumstances, the present petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the order passed by the learned Magistrate. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that P.R.C. No.21 of 2010 was committed to the Court of Sessions and now it is pending before the Court of Principal Assistant sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, as Sessions Case No.620 of 2010. The main contention urged by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that even if the entire version of the statement of the de-facto complainant recorded by the police is considered to be true, it will not make out any case punishable under Section 354 I.P.C. and therefore the said offence has to be deleted from Sessions Case No.620 of 2010 by an order of this Court. Since the matter is pending before the Court of learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, the petitioner can contend before the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, to frame appropriate charges basing on the material available on record and merely because the learned Magistrate added Section 354 I.P.C and converted it into P.R.C., it is not obligatory on the part of the learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, to frame a charge under Section 354 I.P.C. Under these circumstances, without expressing any opinion or merits of the contentions urged by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, a direction is issued to the learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, to hear the submissions made by the petitioner as well as the Additional Public Prosecutor before framing of charges and thereafter to frame appropriate charges. With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. ________________ R. KANTHA RAO, J Dated: 27.10.2010 Dsh.