HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.6483 of 2007 & 6871 OF 2007 DATE:26-08-2010 CRIMINAL PETITION No.6483 OF 2007 BETWEEN A.Khamruddin & Another …Petitioners AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad & Another …Respondents CRIMINAL PETITION No.6871 OF 2007 BETWEEN A.Rami Reddy …Petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad & Another …Respondents THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.6483 of 2007 & 6871 OF 2007 COMMON ORDER: These two petitions are filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in P.R.C.No.42 of 2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Atmakur, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as A.1 to A.3 for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(iii) and 3(2)(ii) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The second respondent-complainant lodged a complaint alleging that the petitioners prepared a false panchanama, arrested the complainant, who belongs to Mala Caste, and remanded him to custody, which resulted in his suspending from service and loosing the employment. It is alleged in the complaint that the petitioners gave a wrong information to the Magistrate stating that they reached the scene of offence on 30.4.2004 at 9.30 a.m. and found an auto bearing No.AP 21U 7377 in the premises of house of the complainant which is connected in connection with Crime No.42 of 2004 registered for the offences under Sections 323, 343, 352, 365, 379 read with 34 IPC and Section 156 Cr.P.C. But the said auto in fact, stands in the name of Gulla Srinivasulu, Bairluty Village, Atmakur Mandal, Kurnool District as per the certificate of registration. Therefore, the petitioners, by furnishing the false information and by drafting the wrong panchanama knowing fully well that the complainant is a person belonged to Mala Community, committed the offence under the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. On filing the compliant, the learned Magistrate recorded the statements of L.Ws.1 to 3 including the statement of complainant and found a prima facie case against the petitioners- A.1 to A.3 for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(iii) and 3(2)(ii) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Therefore, he took the complaint on his file as P.R.C.No.42 of 2007 and issued summons to the petitioners. On issuing the summons, the present petitions are filed to quash the impugned proceedings. The statements of L.Ws.1 to 3, on which basis, the learned Magistrate found a prima facie case existed against the petitioners for the alleged offence, have not been enclosed along with the petitions. Be that as it may, at this stage, I am not inclined to quash the impugned proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on committal of the case to the Court of Sessions, the petitioners may be permitted to file an application to discharge them from the alleged crime. If law permits, it is always open for the petitioners to file an application for discharge, which can be considered on the basis of the complaint allegations and the evidence so recorded. The Criminal Petitions are accordingly dismissed. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. AUGUST 26, 2010 Tsr.