BHAVANAM LALITHA REDDY Vs. PERUMALLA PURNACHANDRA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to direct the V-Additional Munsif Magistrate, Guntur, to frame a charge for the offence punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code against the respondents No. 1 and 2 in C.C. No. 125 of 2012 and to proceed with trial of the case in accordance with law. The petitioner is the de facto complainant in the above case. She lodged a report with the Station House Officer, Arundalpet P.S., against respondents No. 1 and 2 (A.1 and A.2), who are father and son, alleging as under:--

(2.) Basing on the said report, the police registered a case in Crime No. 441 of 2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 509 and 506 of I.P.C., and filed charge-sheet against respondents No. 1 and 2 accordingly. The trial Court also framed charges for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 509 and 506 of I.P.C., and proceeded with the trial. The petitioner was also examined as PW-1. Later, she represented to the Magistrate that she was advised by her Counsel that the offences alleged, in fact, attract the penal provisions under Section 354 of I.P.C., and, therefore, she orally insisted upon the Magistrate to frame a charge for the offence punishable under Section 354 of I.P.C., and thereafter to proceed with the trial, as she is a victim in terms of Section 2(wa) of the Amended Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate rejected her request on the ground that there is no written application by the Public Prosecutor and held that the offence punishable under Section 354 of I.P.C., is not made out from the case record. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner came up with the present criminal petition.

(3.) Now the point for determination in the Criminal Petition is whether the learned Magistrate is right in declining to frame a charge for the offence punishable under Section 354 of I.P.C.?