IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH (7TH) DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN Present: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition No.10626 of 2010 Between: Annabathina Murali … Petitioner And: SHO PS Singarayakonda, Prakasam district & another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Criminal Petition No.10626 of 2010 ORDER: This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing further investigation against the petitioner in Cr.No.92 of 2010 of Singarayakonda PS, Prakasam district. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared for the 2nd respondent. Perused the record. 3. Based on the complaint given by the 2nd respondent, the police registered a case in Cr.No.92 of 2010 against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 323, 379, 506 and 509 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC & ST (POA) Act. According to the complainant, she belongs to schedule tribe and that she is engaged in ‘Girijana Welfare Service Society’. The petitioner who is MPP and also doing contract works through the complainant. She alleges that on promise of giving contract work to her and to assist her in running the organization, he took a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and returned the said amount to the complainant and again, the petitioner took a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- from the complainant and he also developed illicit relationship with her. The complainant further alleges that the petitioner has made attempts to develop illicit intimacy with the complainant’s daughter also and demanded the complainant to assist him in that regard and when the complainant refused to oblige, he beat her indiscriminately. 4. A perusal of the complaint, it discloses very serious and specific allegations against the petitioner, attracting the ingredients of the offences alleged. Having regard to the gravity of the nature of the allegations made, the matter requires thorough investigation. The truth or otherwise of the said allegations can come out only after due investigation and the same cannot be considered at this stage. 5. It is well settled principle of law that the inherent powers of the court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have to be exercised with due care, caution and circumspection and cannot be invoked to thwart the investigation, especially, when there are specific allegations prima- facie attracting the ingredients of the offences alleged. In the present case, there are absolutely no valid or justifiable grounds to invoke the inherent powers of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash further proceedings in Cr.No.92 of 2010 of Singarayakonda PS, inasmuch as specific allegations have been made against the petitioner showing prima-facie case against him. 6. Having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the investigation shall go on. However, the petitioner may not be arrested till the conclusion of investigation and filing of the charge sheet. With the above direction, the criminal petition is dismissed. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 07.12.2010 bss