HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRL.P.No.395 of 2008 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed to quash proceedings in P.R.C.No.25 of 2007, registered for offences punishable under Sections 3 (x) of S.C/S.T. (POA) Act, 1989 and Section 506 IPC on the basis of a complaint given by the 2nd respondent herein (the de facto complainant in Crime No.77 of 2007) (for short ‘the de facto complainant’) against the petitioner herein (A-5 in Crime No.474 of 2007) (for short ‘A-5’) and other accused (A-1 to A-4 in Crime No.474 of 2007) (for short ‘A-1 to A-4’), on the file of the Court of I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Visakhapatnam. 2. The version of the prosecution is as follows: On 14-07-2007, when the de facto complainant was parking his two wheeler at the cellar of Bhavani Apartments situated at Balayya Sastri Layout, Visakahapatnam, the grand children of A-1 were cycling at the cellar causing obstruction to the incoming vehicles. The de facto complainant asked them not to drive the cycle at the cellar, on which, A-1 to A-4 came there and entered into an altercation with the de facto complainant. Meanwhile, the other residents of the apartment came there. Then A-1 to A-4 abused the complainant by touching his caste. Later in the night, after coming to know about the incident, A-5, the brother of A-1, visited the place and abused the de facto complainant and also manhandled him. Thereafter, the de facto complainant gave a report to Visakhapatnam Town police station on the same night and then the case was registered in Crime No.474 of 2007 and the police took up investigation in the matter. 3. The point for consideration is whether there are sufficient grounds are there to quash the proceedings. 4. In the corresponding charge sheet, it is clearly mentioned that as per the investigation done, A-5 was not present at the time of offence. Further, the allegation against A-5 that he abused the de facto complainant with reference to the caste of the de facto complainant and also manhandled him is not found in the F.I.R. statement while reiterating the contents of the statement so far as A-1 to A-4 in the case are concerned. Therefore, it is very clear that without any basis, A-5 was implicated in the charge sheet as one of the persons who abused the de facto complainant with reference to the caste of hatter. 5. Hence, it is a fit case to quash the proceedings so far as A-5 in the case is concerned. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in P.R.C.No.25 of 2007, on the file of the Court of I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Visakhapatnam, so far as A-5 is concerned. ___________________________ 23rd December 2011 G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY,J kvr