IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRL.P.No.10801 OF 2010 Between:- Pattapuri Sadaiah and 5 others …Petitioners A n d The State of A.P., Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another …Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRL.P.No.10801 OF 2010 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing further proceedings against the petitioners/A-1 to A-6 in Cr.No.68 of 2010 of Zafargadh Police Station, Warangal District. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. Perused the records. 3. On a complaint given by the second respondent, a case in Cr.No.68 of 2010 was registered against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 324, 354 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 3(i)(x) of the SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989. According to the complainant, he belongs to schedule tribe community and that on 17-10-2010 at about 06-00 pm., his wife Arunasree along with his brother-in-law Anil came on scooty to the kirana shop of D.Ramanadham for purchasing of milk and that A-2 and A-3 who were sitting in a book stall adjacent to the Kirana Shop, on seeing the complainant’s wife, entered the kirana shop and teased her and A-2 has put his hand on the shoulder of complainant’s wife in a manner outraging her modesty and when Anil, brother-in- law of the complainant intervened, A-2 and A-3 abused him also and A-2 slapped on the cheek of Anil and when Anil went aside to telephone to the complainant, the accused again questioned the complainant’s wife in a teasing manner and the complainant telephoned to the complainant’s mother from kirana shop and the complainant and his mother Tulasamma and others went to the scene and questioned A-2, who was still there about the misconduct and meanwhile A-1 A-3, A-4, A-5 and A-6 came there and threatened them in the name of their caste and warned them not to enter their village and also attacked them with stones and hands and the complainant’s brother Praveen and others sustained injuries. 4. Having regard to the seriousness of the offence alleged and the specific allegations made in the complaint prima facie attracting the ingredients of the offences alleged, the matter requires thorough investigation to ascertain the truth or otherwise of the said allegations. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the first petitioner is member of ZPTC and the second respondent- complainant is the member of MPTC and on account of political rivalry, a false complaint is lodged. The question as to the truth or otherwise of the allegations contained in the complaint cannot be gone into in the present proceedings and the same has to be considered only after investigation is completed. When the complaint discloses specific allegations and the ingredients of the alleged offences are prima facie shown to be attracted, thwarting of further investigation into the complaint is uncalled for. On the other hand, having regard to the gravity of the nature of offences alleged, it is necessary that the same is investigated into. 6. It is well established principle of law that the inherent powers of this Court have to be exercised with care, caution and circumspection and they cannot be invoked to thwart further investigation, especially when the complaint discloses prima facie commission of the alleged offences. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that no specific allegation is made against the petitioner/A- 1. The complaint contains an allegation that the first petitioner along with others participated in the alleged offence. The nature and extent of the role played by the first petitioner in the commission of the alleged offence, is a matter for investigation and hence the same cannot be considered in the present proceedings. 8. There are absolutely no valid or justifiable grounds to quash further proceedings against the petitioners/A-1 to A-6 in Cr.No.68 of 2010 of Zafargadh Police Station, Warangal District. 9. In the result, the criminal petition is dismissed. _____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 24th November, 2010 Lrkm.