IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Wednesday, the 29th day of June, 2011 Present: Hon’ble Sri Justice N. Ravi Shankar Crl.P.No. 5099 of 2011 Between: I. Venkata Lakshmi and another …Petitioners and The State of AP and another …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR Crl.P.No. 5099 of 2011 O r d e r: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners Sri O. Manohar Reddy and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. The offence alleged is one punishable under section 3 (1 (x) of the Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Attrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’). The allegations in the FIR would show that both these petitioners have abused the de facto complainant in the name of his caste. The learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that the ingredients of section 3 (1) (x) of the Act are not fully shown in the complaint and therefore the FIR should be quashed. I am unable to agree with this contention. 3. It may be noted that in Ashabai Machindra Adhagale v. State of Maharashtra[1] it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that once the offences are alleged under section 3 (1 (x) of the Act, it is for the investigating agency to investigate into the matter and reach its conclusion regarding applicability or non-applicability of the Act. In these circumstances it follows that there are no grounds to entertain this petition. 4. It may however be noted that both the petitioners are stated to be mother and son and there are certain disputes also between the de facto complainant and the husband of the first petitioner regarding payment of money. In view of this the police are directed to keep in view S. 41 Cr.P.C. as it stands now before taking a decision regarding their arrest. 5. With this direction this petition is dismissed at the admission stage. _____________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J. June 29, 2011. *BVS [1] 2009 (3) SCC 789