HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9788 OF 2010 DATE: 04.10.2010 BETWEEN: Batthina Ramesh. - - - Petitioner/De- facto complainant. AND Erramsetti Sathyanarayana and three others. - - - Respondents This Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9788 OF 2010 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in P.R.C. No.19 of 2008 on the file of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sattupalli, Khammam District (Hereinafter referred to as ‘learned Magistrate’) and also to cancel the Non-Bailable Warrants issued therein against respondents 1 to 3. De-facto complainant and accused are present. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the de-facto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor for the State. A report was lodged by the petitioner/de-facto complainant, alleging that the Respondents 1 to 3/A-1 to A-3 abused him in the name of his caste on the ground that he had stolen cashew nuts from their garden. Basing on the report, the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, conducted investigation and filed charge sheet alleging the commission of offences punishable under Sections 294 (b) and 506 I.P.C. According to the investigating officer, no offence under the Section 3 (1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (For short, ‘the Act’) has been committed and therefore, he did not file any charge sheet under any provision of the said Act. Subsequently, the Magistrate took cognizance of the case under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Act also. However, in the meanwhile, it appears that at the intervention of the elders, the petitioner as well as the Respondents 1 to 3, who belong to the same village, compromised the matter. However, they could not compound the offence before the trial Court, since the offence under the POA Act is non compoundable and the petition is, therefore filed to quash the proceedings. The de-facto complainant, who is now present in the Court, stated that he compromised the matter with the respondents 1 to 3 at the intervention of the elders and he himself filed the present Criminal Petition to quash P.R.C. No.19 of 2008 and also to cancel the NBWs issued against the respondents 1 to 3. In the circumstances stated herein above, if the case is kept pending on the file of learned Magistrate, it is nothing but abuse of process of Court. Moreover, in view of the compromise, there is no possibility for the petitioner to depose against the respondents 1 to 3. If the case is allowed to continue on the file of learned Magistrate, it will cause much inconvenience and hardship to the parties. Therefore, to meet the requirements of justice, this Court is of the considered view that the proceedings can be quashed as required in the Criminal Petition. Consequently, all the proceedings in P.R.C. No.19 of 2008, on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sattupalli, Khammam district, are quashed and the NBWs issued against the respondents 1 to 3 (A-1 to A-3) are also cancelled. The Criminal Petition is accordingly allowed. ________________ R. KANTHA RAO, J Dated: 04.10.2010 Dsh.