IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.3887 OF 2009 Between: V.Subhash … PETITIONER And 1. The State of A.P. 2. N.Gangadhar … RESPONDENTS AND This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.3887 OF 2009 ORDER: 1. Crime No.117 of 2009 of Nampally Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 3 (1) (x) of the SCs & STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and Section 507 I.P.C. is the result of difference between two officers in the Information and Public Relations Department of the Government of Andhra Pradesh, namely, the petitioner/accused working as Joint Director and the second respondent/de facto complainant working as Deputy Director. The second respondent has now become Joint Director. The second respondent in his report to the police did not state to which community he belongs to whether Mala community or any other community. The allegation made by him against the petitioner is that the petitioner was scolding him as Mala bastard. The alleged incident took place on 03.04.2008. The report was given to the police on 21.05.2009, more than one year thereafter. No doubt, the second respondent is stated to have given report against the petitioner to the Special Commissioner in whose office both of them were working. 2. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that the alleged incident, on 03.04.2008, took place in the office chamber of the petitioner and that it is not a place of public view. 3. Reason for giving report on 21.05.2009 to the police by the second respondent is that he received telephone call from the petitioner in which the petitioner threatened to kill the second respondent, his wife and children. The second respondent did not intend to give any report about the alleged scolding him as Mala bastard. Thus, having regard to delay in giving report, failure to mention about his caste by the second respondent in the report, place of scolding being chamber of the petitioner and intention of the second respondent in giving report on 21.05.2009, this Court is of the opinion that registering the case against the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (x) of the SCs & STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is unsustainable in law. 4. Insofar as offence punishable under Section 507 I.P.C. is concerned, there are no allegations to the effect that the telephone caller kept himself anonymous or took precaution to conceal name etc., of the person from whom the threat came, and so ingredients of the above penal provision cannot be attracted. Even in the report, the second respondent named the caller as the petitioner. In internal dispute between two officers of the same department, this Court is of the opinion that invoking of Section 507 I.P.C. will not arise at all. 5. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed quashing F.I.R. in Crime No.117 of 2009 of Nampally Police Station. However, this order should not come in the way of departmental proceedings pending and to be taken against the petitioner. ______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J August 13, 2010 KL HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.3887 OF 2009 August 13, 2010 KL