HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 3661 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is A-1 in CC No.350 of 2007 on the file of the Addl. Munsif Magistrate, Kandukur, Prakasam District in the private complaint lodged against the petitioner herein for the offence punishable u/Sec.324 r/w. 34 IPC. It would appear that the complaint against the petitioner by the 2nd respondent was also registered as Crime No.36 of 2007 on the file Ponnaluru Police Station. As already pointed out, the offence is only u/Sec.324 r/w. 34 IPC. 2. While so, the 2nd respondent who is the defacto complainant filed a petition before the trial court in Crl.M.P.No.5493 of 2007. The 2nd respondent sought to take the case on file under the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (POA) Act 1989 (the Act, for short). The learned Judicial First Class Magistrate passed orders on 8.2.2008 allowing Crl.M.P.No.5493 of 2007 and took the case on file against the petitioner under the provisions of the Act apart from u/Sec.324 r/w. 34 IPC. The 1st accused assails the same. 3. Sri C.Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that no case under the provisions of the Act is prima-facie made out. On 16.7.2007 when the father of the 2nd respondent was on the road consuming tea, the accused drove his auto in a rash manner resulting in cowdung splashing over the body of the father of the defacto complainant. When the father of the defacto complainant questioned the conduct of the accused in driving the auto in such a rash and negligent manner, it would appear that a verbal alteration occurred between the father of the defacto complainant and the accused wherein the accused allegedly abused the father of the defacto complainant touching upon his community. (It may be noticed that the defacto complaint is a member of the schedule caste community.) It may be recalled that the incident between the father of the defacto complainant and the accused occurred on 16.7.2007. 4. In this background, it is the case of the defacto complainant that on 19.7.1997 i.e. 3 days after the incident between the accused and the father of the defacto complainant, the incident in the present case occurred. 5. It is the case of the defacto complainant that while he was discussing with the mother of the accused about the conduct of the accused on 16.7.2007, the accused beat the defacto complainant with an axe. There was no whisper in the complaint that the accused committed any of the offences contemplated by the Act against the defacto complainant. The complaint does not even refer to the above the act, but merely refers to an earlier incident dated 16.7.2007 which was the incident with reference to an offence under the Act. 6. Thus, absolutely no allegations are made against the accused under the provisions of the Act in the complaint which was registered as PRC No. 9 of 2008. I therefore, agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the accused that prima-facie no offence is made out for a case u/Sec.3(1)(x) of the Act and that such an order by the learned Addl. Munsif Magistrate is bad and is liable to be quashed. 7. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed. The order in Crl.M.P.No.5493 of 2007 is quashed. The case shall be reconverted against the petitioner as CC No.350 of 2007 from PRC No.9 of 2008. The learned Judicial First Class Magistrate shall proceed against the petitioner for the offence punishable u/Sec.324 r/w 34 IPC only under the procedure contemplated by the Criminal Procedure Code. __________________________ JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Dt. 31-03-2011 Mjl/*1