HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2038 OF 2009 DATED 19TH OCTOBER, 2011. BETWEEN Adaka Raja Sekhar @ Rajesh …….Petitioner and The State of Andhra Pradesh,SHO, Pedana Police Station,Through Public Prosecutor,AP High Court, Hyderbad And anr ……Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2038 OF 2009 ORDER: This Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed to quash the crime No. 117 of 2008 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. on the file of the Station House Officer, Police Station, Pedanna, Krishna District. The second respondent lodged a complaint with the first respondent-Police stating that when she was crying by scolding the persons who were responsible for the death of his son, who was found missing from 19.12. 2005 and was later found burried by covering with mud and hay on 27.12.2005, Panchakarla Suresh, Panchakarla Umamaheswara Rao, Panchakarla Subbarao, Panchakarla Ramana and Panchakarla Chanti questioned her and also attacked her and her husband and scolded in an un parliamentary language. In the said complaint, she stated that earlier she filed a police complaint as well as private complaint, but the same were closed as false. She further stated that on 19.12.2005, apart from the above said persons, one Gajula Peddiraju took her son in the auto of Adaka Rajesh (A.4/petitioner herein) to Pullapadu road and killed him with the help of a towel and brought back the body to the village and buried him in the pond .She also stated the reason as to why her son was killed by them. Pursuant to the said complaint, the police registered the same as Crime No. 117 of 2008 under Section 174 Cr.P.C., and took up investigation. The learned Counsel for the petitioner (A.4) submitted that earlier the police complaint as well as private complaint filed by the second respondent were closed as false and there is inordinate delay in filing the present complaint, that too, with the same set of allegations. He submitted that the petitioner herein did not own any auto as alleged by the complainant. He asserted that there is no iota of evidence to implicate the petitioner in the aforesaid crime and only basing on the allegations of the second respondent, the police registered the said crime against the petitioner along with others. He argued that the petitioner is in no way connected with the said crime in as much as there is no specific overt act or allegation attributable to him. The second respondent with an intention to wrongful gain, implicated the petitioner in the aforesaid crime. Heard both side. Perused the case file. While dealing with a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where the prayer is to quash the complaint, this court is only to read the complaint along with the documents, if any, annexed therewith and see whether, on the allegations made therein, the alleged offence has been committed. This court would therefore see whether on taking the allegations and the complaint as they are, without adding anything thereto or subtracting anything there from, the alleged offence is made out. If an offence is made out, then this court would not be justified in quashing the proceedings pending before the trial court. It is also well established that the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be used only very sparingly to prevent abuse of the process of the court. The second respondent specifically mentioned in her complaint the names of the persons who caused the death of her son and also as to why her son was killed by the accused. She also specifically stated that the petitioner herein took her son in the auto to Pullapadu road. Whether the petitioner owned an auto or travelled in the auto along with other accused and son of the complainant would only be known only after a full-fledged trial. The First Information Report is only an initiation to move the machinery and to investigate into a cognizable offence and, therefore, while exercising the power and deciding whether the investigation itself should be quashed, utmost care should be taken by the Court and at that stage it is not possible for the Court to sift the evidence or to weigh the materials and then come to the conclusion one way or the other. Having heard the learned Counsel and after perusing the material papers on record, it would be noticeable that specific allegations are levelled against the petitioner. When exercising jurisdiction under S. 482 of the Cr.P.C. this Court would not embark upon a roving enquiry to find out as to whether the allegations in question are reliable or otherwise; or whether on a reasonable appreciation the accusations would not be sustained. That is the function of the trial Judge. Judicial process should not be an instrument of oppression, or needless harassment. These aspects can as well be agitated by the petitioner before the trial court by way of their defence. By no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the allegations made in the First Information Report, if taken at its face value and if accepted in its entirety, does not even prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the petitioner. It is well settled that when a complaint is lodged at the police station and an offence is registered, the mala fides of the informant would be of secondary importance at that stage. It is the material collected during the investigation and evidence led in court which decides the fate of the accused person. The allegations of mala fides against the informant are of no consequence and cannot by themselves be the basis for quashing the proceedings For the foregoing discussion and keeping in mind the specific allegations made against the petitioner, it would not be proper for this Court to thwart the investigation at the threshold. Thus, I find that there are no valid or justifiable grounds to exercise the power of this court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the aforesaid crime. The Criminal Petition is accordingly dismissed. --------------------------------------------- JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA Dated 19th October, 2011. Msnro