IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICIATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH, AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRTIEETH DAY OF NOVEMBER THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRL.P.No.6597 OF 2010 Between:- P.Venugopal Reddy …Petitioner A n d The State of A.P., through its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another. …Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRL.P.No.6597 OF 2010 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing further proceedings against the petitioner/A-4 in Cr.No.33 of 2010 of Tandur Police Station, Ranga Reddy District. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the second respondent-complainant. Perused the record. 3. Based on the complaint given by the second respondent, a case in Cr.No.33 of 2010 was registered by Tandur Police against the petitoner/A-4 and others alleging offences under Sections 500 and 506–II IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The complainant is stated to be a Municipal Councillor of Ward No.14 of Tandur Municipality. The petitioner is stated to be a Press Reporter of Andhra Prabha Daily. According to the complainant, at the instance of the petitioner/A-4, a press report appeared in Andhra Prabha Daily on 18-01-2010, wherein it is alleged that the complainant has been resorting to illegal collection of money in connection with release of gas connections and sanction of loans to DWCRA groups. The complainant further alleges that when she gave a complaint to the police against the petitoner/A-4 on 19-01- 2010, the police have not taken any action and the petitioner/A-4 came to her house and threatened her with dire consequences and abused her in the name of her caste and demanded her to withdraw the complaint. 4. The truth or otherwise of the said allegations as to whether the petitioner/A-4 threatened and demanded the complainant to withdraw the complaint and abused her in the name of her caste, is a matter to be ascertained only at the time of necessary investigation, but not at this stage. 5. Having regard to the gravity of the nature of the offences alleged and in view of the specific allegations made in the complaint, it is considered not a fit case to invoke the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is well settled that the inherent powers of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C have to be exercised with care, caution and circumspection and they cannot be invoked to thwart further investigation, that too at the threshold stage, into the complaint, wherein specific allegations have been made prima facie attracting the ingredients of the offences alleged. 6. There are no valid or sufficient grounds to quash further investigation in Cr.No.33 of 2010 of Tandur Police Station, Ranga Reddy District. However, the petitioner/A- 4 may not be arrested till the conclusion of investigation and filing of the charge sheet, if any, in connection with the above crime. 7. In the result, the criminal petition is dismissed with the above direction. _____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 30th November, 2010 Note: CC in two days B/o Lrkm.