THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.4646 OF 2009 Dated 13-10-2011 Between: Alamuri Gangulappa and others. ..Petitioners. And: The State of A.P., through Station Office, Patnam P.S. Anantapur District, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and another. … Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.4646 OF 2009 ORDER: Petitioners 1 to 3 i.e, A.1, A.2 and A.4 in P.R.C.No.15 of 2004 on the file of the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kadiri, are seeking to quash the proceedings in the said P.R.C. against them. There are four accused in the case. The 1st petitoner/A.1 appears to be the father of petitioners 2 and 3 i.e., A.2 and A.4 and the petitioners 2 and 3 i.e.,A.2 and A.4 appears to be the sons of 1st petitioner i.e., A.1. The charge sheet was filed for the offence under Section 324 read with 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “the Act”). A reading of the charge sheet discloses that there is a dispute between the accused and the complainant relating to some land and there is also litigation in connection therewith. In the F.I.R. also, it is stated that all of them abused the complainant in the name of his caste. The complainant’s wife was beaten with a stone on her head by Nadipi Gangulappa/A.2. A perusal of the complaint and F.I.R. shows that an omnibus allegation is made against all the accused i.e., A.1 to A.4 that they scolded the complainant in the name of his caste. It is obvious that all the four accused are roped in for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act. Therefore, I am of the opinion that sweeping and omnibus allegation cannot be sustained. To the extent of the offence under Section 3(1) (x) of the Act, the proceedings are liable to be quashed against the petitioners 1 to 3 i.e., A.1, A.2 and A.4. To the extent of allegation under Section 324 I.P.C., the question as to whether there is a common intention on the part of the petitioners 1 to 3 i.e., A.1, A.2 and A.4 is to be decided at the time of trial and it cannot be gone into in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the petition insofar as it related to the offence under Section 324 read with 34 I.P.C. is concerned, is liable to be dismissed. In the result, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed quashing the proceedings against the petitioners 1 to 3 i.e., A.1, A.2 and A.4 to the extent of the offence under Section 3(1) (x) of the Act is concerned, it stands dismissed in other respects. ____________________ B. CHANDRA KUMAR, J. Date: 13-10-2011 Dvs THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.4646 OF 2009 Dated 13-10-2011