THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITIION No.18573 of 2009 Date: 08.09.2009 Between: Mamidi Jyoti. ..Petitioner and The Superintendent of Police and others. ..Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITIION No. 18573 of 2009 ORDER: 1. This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the inaction of the respondents to include the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (‘the Act’ for brevity), in Crime No.155 of 2004 on the file of Tuni Rulral Police Station, registered against one Keerthi Srinu, which was numbered as C.C.No.79 of 2005 and pending on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tuni, East Godavari District, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently to issue such direction. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she belongs to scheduled tribe community; that she was married to one Karri Raju in 2000; that her husband died in 2004; that thereafter she started working in cashew nut factory; that while going to the work place, she got acquaintance with one Keerthi Srinu, who belongs to kapu community, and they married; that Keerthi Srinu lived with her only for a period of three months and left by deceiving her, and therefore, she filed a complaint against him, which was registered in Crime No.155 of 2004 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 417, 420 and 493 I.P.C. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that Keerthi Srinu deceived her since she belongs to scheduled tribe community, and therefore, the respondents shall include the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act in Crime No.155 of 2004. 4. The only argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that inasmuch as the offences alleged against Keerthi Srinu in Crime No.155 of 2004 are punishable for more than ten years, charge under the provisions of the Act, in particular Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, shall have to be included. 5. Section 3(2)(v) of the Act reads as under: 3. Punishment for offences of atrocities: (2) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe:- (v) commits any offence under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) punishable with imprisonment for a term of ten years or more against a person or property on the ground that such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe or such property belongs to such member, shall be punishable with imprisonment for life and with fine; 6. It is very difficult to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner since the allegations made in the complaint or even in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition do not attract the aforesaid provision. In any event, as the complaint was already registered; after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in Crime No.155 of 2004 and the case was numbered as C.C.No.79 of 2005 pending before the learned Magistrate, at this stage, the petitioner cannot approach this Court with the relief as sought for. The further ground for which this writ petition cannot be entertained is that though the allegations are made against Keerthi Srinu, he is not even made as a party respondent in the writ petition. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any ground to entertain the writ petition, which is devoid of any merit and the relief sought for cannot be granted. 8. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed, at the admission stage. No order as to costs. _____________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 08th September, 2009 GHN