Dismissed

R. Adinarayana v. The State

Telangana HC1 Nov 2011CRLP/9948/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed a criminal petition challenging the initiation of proceedings against accused alleging assault on public servants. The court held that truth of allegations is a question of fact for the investigating officer and directed parties to approach the officer regarding compromise.

What did the court decide?

Criminal petition dismissed; petitioners directed to approach investigating officer regarding compromise.

R. Adinarayana Vs The State — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU

¶3

CRIMINAL PETITION No.9948 of 2009

¶4

DATE: 01.11.2011

¶5

Between:

¶6

R.Adinarayana and others

¶7

…… Petitioners And

¶8

The Station House Officer, I Town Police Station, Srikakulam Town & District, rep. by Public Prosecutor And 2 others

¶9

…..Respondents

¶10

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU

¶11

CRIMINAL PETITION No.9948 of 2009

¶12

ORDER :

¶13

The petitioners 1 to 4/A-1 to A-4 are accused of offence punishable under Section 353/34 I.P.C. It is alleged that when the respondents 2 and 3 who are Superintendent and Attender in S.C. Corporation at Srikakulam went to S.C. Corporation building wherein shop rooms are located, for the purpose of collection of rents and examining the building for the purpose of repairs, A-1 to A-4 attacked them demanding for release of shop No.4 which was taken possession by the Corporation. It is further alleged that when the situation was being explained to the accused, A-1 to A-4 went in aggression and beat attender/3^rd respondent

¶14

and that when it was reported in the Collector’s office and when another set of officers along with staff went there, they also beat another attender by name T.Mangamma. Since S.C. Corporation is a Government Corporation, the victims are public servants within the meaning of Section 21 I.P.C. The allegations in the report to the police attract the ingredients of the penal section of law for which the case was registered by the police. Truth or otherwise of the said allegations is a question of fact which investigating officer has to decide after collecting evidence of the witnesses.

¶15

2) It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that subsequently the matter is compromised between the parties and that therefore, there is no need for further investigation in this criminal case. In case the matter is compromised between the parties, then it is open to both the parties to approach the investigating officer and report the same before him, in which event the investigating officer will record statements of both the parties and in case the investigating officer finds the compromise to be true and voluntary, then it is open to the investigating officer to drop the case and to file referred charge sheet before the Magistrate. In case there is no compromise, the investigating officer is at liberty to proceed further in this crime.

¶16

3) Subject to the above observations, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

¶17

November 1, 2011 ksh

¶18

SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J

R. Adinarayana v. The State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Adinarayana v. The State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Rasheed, Vs The State of A.P.

Adam Razvi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

V.R.Prasad, Vs Chittempalli Praveen Kumar

S. Mohan Reddy Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Gourishetty Santhosh Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Rapolu Anand, Vs The State of a.P., Rep by its Sho,.