IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH (13TH) DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition No.10276 of 2010 Between: Dr. S. Suresh … Petitioner And: P.S. Kothagudem III Town, Khammam district Rep. by the P.P., State of A.P., & another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition No.10276 of 2010 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing further proceedings against the petitioner in Cr.No.138 of 2010 of Kothagudem III Town PS, Khammam district. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent. Perused the record. 3. Based on the complaint given by the 2nd respondent, police registered a case in Cr.No.138 of 2010 against the petitioner alleging the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (POA) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’). It is stated that the petitioner is the medical practicener and Ophthalmologist, running nursing home in the name of ‘Aswini Eye Clinic’. According to the 2nd respondent, he went to the petitioner for treatment on 02.09.2010 for eye ailment and the petitioner prescribed some tablets, but there was no cure and so he again went there on 15.09.2010 and the petitioner advised him to wear spectacles and that as there was no improvement, the complainant again went to the petitioner on 24.09.2010, on which date the complainant was administered with an injection and the complainant suffered vomiting and that he again went to the petitioner on 25.09.2010 and at that time, the petitioner abused the complainant in the name of the caste. 4. A perusal of the complaint would disclose that what all the petitioner is alleged to have told to the complainant is that the complainant was vexing him and was not able to understand what the petitioner was doing and though the entire world is changing, the complainant is not changing. The complaint does not disclose that the petitioner used any abusive language against the complainant and that too in the name of his caste. A perusal of the complaint would only show that by repeated visits of the complainant, the petitioner-doctor got vexed and expressed his anguish against the complainant. The complaint does not disclose that the petitioner intended to assault the complainant or he abused the complainant in the name of his caste. The ingredients of the alleged offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act are not attracted even prima-facie to the present case even if the contents of the complaint are taken to be true. It appears to be the best example of abuse of well-intended beneficial provision in a social welfare legislation, like the SCs & STs (POA) Act. It is well settled that when the contents of the complaint even if taken to be true do not disclose the commission of any offence and do not attract the ingredients of the alleged offence, the continuance of further proceedings in pursuance of such complaint is nothing but abuse of process of law. 5. In the circumstances, it is held that it is a fit case to invoke the inherent powers of the Court under section 482 Cr.P.C. and quash further proceedings against the petitioner in FIR No.138 of PS Kothagudem III Town. Accordingly, the proceedings against the petitioner in FIR No.138 of Kothagudem III Town PS are quashed. 6. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed. ___________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 13.12.2010 bss