THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA CRL.R.C.No. 682 of 2006. ORDER: This revision case is filed by the petitioner/accused against the order dt. 29.11.2004 in Crl.M.P.No. 517 of 2004 in S.C.No. 505 of 2003 on the file of the learned VII Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for trial of Communal Offences, Hyderabad whereby the learned VII Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 227 Cr.P.C. seeking to discharge him of the offence under Section 354 IPC. The petitioner/accused filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No. 517 of 2004 under Section 227 Cr.P.C. seeking to discharge him of the offence under Section 354 IPC on the ground that there is no prima facie case against him to frame charge against him for the said offence. The petitioner stated in the affidavit that he is a business man having a permanent residence at Hyderabad and he has got acquaintance with the de facto complainant Smt. Latha Jain through Smt. Dr.R.M.Saboo and marriage alliance was proposed with Hema Jain who is the sister of the de facto complainant and the marriage alliance could not be fixed due to various reasons. From the order under revision, it appears that the relations between the petitioner and the de facto complainant are stained due to some civil transactions and further it appears that the parties filed cases and counter cases against each other. The facts of the case in S.C.No. 505 of 2003 are that on 30.7.2003, the de facto complainant went to Lateef Khan building near L.B.Stadium to get some clarification in her telephone bill and at about 3.15 p.m. while she was climbing the stair case, the petitioner/accused who has been harassing her for the past few months, came to her and asked her to marry him and when she refused, he pulled her hand and put his hand on her chest and threatened her to harass if she does not marry him and that on the complaint lodged by the de facto complainant, a case in Cr.No. 270 of 2003 under Section 354 IPC was registered by the Police Abids and after investigation, charge sheet was filed against the petitioner and the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate committed the case in the relevant PRC to the Court of Sessions for trial in S.No. 505 of 2003. The grounds raised by the petitioner for discharging him of the offence under Section 354 IPC are that there is delay in lodging the FIR and that the witnesses cited in the list of witnesses are set up for the purpose of this case and as a matter of fact no incident at all took place and that as a counter blast to the FIR in Cr.No. 691 of 2003 preferred by him against Smt. Latha Jain at Afzalgunj P.S. she has filed a false complaint. However, the trial court dismissed the petition holding that there is prima facie evidence against the petitioner/accused for framing a charge for the offence under Section 354 IPC. With regard to the ground that there is delay in lodging the FIR, the trial court held that it is not the stage to decide where the delay can be taken into consideration for discharging the accused. With regard to the ground that the witnesses cited in the list of witnesses are set up for the purpose of this case, the trial court held that whether the witnesses cited in the list of witnesses are actually have witnessed the incident or not is a question of fact which can be extracted in the cross examination of prosecution witnesses and it is not the stage to discharge the petitioner/accused on the ground. The reasoning given by the learned VII Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge in dismissing the petition are cogent and convincing. This Court is convinced that the order under revision does not suffer from any error or irregularity much less any illegality warranting interference from this revisional court. Hence, the revision case is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. In the result, the revision case is dismissed. ____________________ B.N.Rao Nalla,J --01—2010 Krb. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA CRL.R.C.No. 682 of 2006. Dt. –01—2010.