IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.283 of 2010 Between: Killada Thavitayya ... PETITIONER (petitioner/accused) AND The State of A.P., rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and another ... RESPONDENTS ORDER: This revision is directed against the order, dated 08-01-2010 passed in Criminal M.P.No.58 of 2009 in S.C.No.36 of 2009 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Parvathipuram, whereby and whereunder the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Parvathipuram dismissed the petition filed under Sections 227 and 228 of Cr.P.C. 2. The petitioner is the sole accused in S.C.No.36 of 2009. A report came to be presented by M. Anusha before the Station House Officer, Parvathipuram on 06-09-2008 at 12.00 hours alleging, inter alia, that the petitioner attempted to outrage her modesty and tried to snatch the policy bonds from her. Other details in the complaint are not required to be referred for disposal of this revision. 3. The Station House Officer, Parvathipuram registered a case in Crime No.90 of 2008 for the offences under Sections 420, 354 and 341 of IPC and issued First Information Report. After due investigation, a charge sheet came to be submitted before the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Parvathipuram. The learned Magistrate took the charge sheet on file as P.R.C. and committed the case to the Sessions Division, Vizianagaram as the offence under Section 354 IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Session. On committal the learned Sessions Judge took the case on file as S.C.No.36 of 2009 and made over the same to the Assistant Sessions Judge, Parvathipuram for disposal according to law. 4. The petitioner/accused entered appearance before the Assistant Sessions Judge, Parvathipuram and moved Criminal M.P.No.58 of 2009 under Sections 227 and 228 of Cr.P.C., seeking his discharge for the offence under Section 354 IPC and transfer the case for trial to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vizianagaram for trial of the case relatable to other offences. 5. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Parvathipuram, on considering the material brought on record and more particularly the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. proceeded to frame a charge under Section 354 IPC and dismissed the application filed under Sections 227 and 228 of Cr.P.C., by order dated 08-01-2010. The said order is assailed in this revision. 6. Head learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State and perused the material brought on record. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that even if the report and statement of the defacto complainant recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., are taken into consideration in toto, no ingredients of Section 354 IPC are made out and therefore, the order impugned in the revision is liable to be set aside and the application filed by the petitioner/accused seeking discharge for the offence under Section 354 IPC deserves to be allowed. 7. I have gone through the charge sheet filed in Crime No.90 of 2008 and also the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The victim categorically stated that the petitioner with an intention to outrage her modesty caught hold of her and dragged her and abused her in filthy language. The victim is a LIC Officer and she is aged about 20 years. The specific statement of the victim is that the petitioner/accused threatened her that he would outraged her modesty and thereupon, he caught hold of her and dragged her followed by abuses. The trial court perused the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C., and came to a conclusion that the material brought on record is sufficient to frame charge under Section 354 IPC. I do not see any irregularity or illegality in the order impugned in the revision warranting interference of this court in exercise of powers under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. 8. Accordingly, this revision fails and dismissed at the admission stage. ___________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J February 17, 2010. PN THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.283 of 2010 February 17, 2010