HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY CRIMINAL PETITION No:1903 OF 2009 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner-accused in C.C.No.222 of 2008 on the file of the learned X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. 2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused and the 2nd respondent-defacto-complainant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the 1st respondent-State. Perused the record. 3. The petitioner is facing prosecution for the offence under Sections 500 & 506 IPC in C.C.No.222 of 2008 on the file of the learned X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. The 2nd respondent herein filed a private complaint against the petitioner-accused alleging that she was his senior in the school and that their association as friends continued even after completion of their studies in the school and that the petitioner-accused wanted to marry the complainant and the complainant was not agreeable for the same and that the petitioner-accused sent defamatory messages through her off-line messages ‘zens pinky’ defaming the complainant. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner-accused would submit that even assuming that the accused sent such messages still in the absence of any evidence to show that they were circulated among others and any other person had any access to the contents of the said messages, they cannot be considered to be defamatory and the ingredients of the offence under Sections 506 IPC are not attracted. The contents of the messages, which are extracted in the complaint, are certainly not in good taste. Whether they are defamatory in nature or not is a matter to be decided on evidence that would be adduced in the course of trial. 5. In the complaint, it is alleged that the petitioner-accused has been making false propaganda against the complainant and she has indulged in filing false cases against the complainant and also tried to extract money from the complainant. The truth or otherwise of the said allegations cannot be considered at this stage and they are matters to be ascertained after evidence is adduced. Apart from the offence of defamation under Section 500 IPC, the complainant has alleged certain other offences under Section 506 and 384 IPC also in the complaint. 6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the complainant promised to marry the petitioner-accused and he took her to his house four or five times and forced her to have sexual relationship with him and the petitioner-accused herein obliged him believing his words that he would marry her and subsequently, he refused to marry her and he cheated her and she gave a complaint to the police in Crime No.425 of 2007 and therefore, the present complaint is filed by the complainant herein as a counter blast to the complaint given by the petitioner-accused in Crime No.425 of 2007. The question as to whether the present complaint filed by the 2nd respondent-complainant herein is in the nature of counter-blast to the FIR in Crime No.425 of 2007 as alleged by the petitioner-accused herein is also a matter to be considered by the trial Court on evidence. 7. It is not disputed that after due investigation into the FIR in Crime No.425 of 2007, the police have filed a charge sheet against the 2nd respondent-complainant herein and the matter is pending for trial. 8. In the circumstances, having regard to the serious nature of the allegations made in the present complaint and also the case registered in Crime No.425 of 2007, it is considered that the truth or otherwise of the allegations and counter allegations is to be decided only after necessary evidence is adduced during the course of trial, but not at this stage. 9. Having regard to the facts of the present case and the nature of the allegations made and the seriousness of the offences alleged, it is considered not a fit case to invoke the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quash further proceedings. It is well settled that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have to be exercised with care and caution and cannot be invoked to scuttle the prosecution especially, when specific allegations are made prima facie attracting ingredients of the offences alleged. There are no valid and justifiable grounds to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.222 of 2008 on the file of the learned X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. 10. In the result, Criminal Petition is dismissed. Interim stay granted earlier is vacated. ________________________ Justice G.V. Seethapathy Date: 18th November, 2010 Nn. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.V. SEETHAPATHY CRIMINAL PETITION No:1903 OF 2009 18.11.2010