ORDER This Criminal Petition has been filed to quash the First-Information Report in Cr. No. 87/2008 of IV Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam. 2. Sri T.M.K. Chaitanya, learned counsel forthe petitioners, and Sri A. Ramesh, learned counsel, representing the learned public prosecutor, for the 2nd respondent, are heard. No notice is being ordered to the 151 respondent, as the petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission. 3. On the written report of the 151 respondent, the police registered the crime in question under Sections 269 and 270 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegations in the written report show that the 1st respondent is aggrieved due to the alleged acts of the petitioners herein in storing huge quantity of chemicals in the premises, harmful to human health and damaging to the building. The 1st respondent also alleged about an incident of fire on 21-10-2007 and desired the police to take action to protect the safety and health of inmates of the building. 4. The material papers filed by the petitioners also referred to O.S. 29/2008 filed by the 1st respondent herein before the Civil Court at Visakhapatnam, seeking possession of the premises in question from the petitioners herein and also the petition moved by the 151 respondent herein in the said suit for a temporary mandatory injunction for removal of all the chemicals dangerous to human life from the schedule premises. 5. The petitioners rightly contended in this petition that Sections 269 and 270 of the Indian Penal Code are irrelevant to the allegations made by the 1st respondent in the written report or the suit and the petitioners also referred to certain decisions on the aspect to plead that the First Information Report shall be quashed. 6. Section 269 of the Indian Penal Code deals with negligent act likely to spread infection of diseases dangerous to life, while Section 270 thereof deals with malignant act likely to spread infection of diseases dangerous to life. The plain and unambiguous language of the said two provisions has absolutely no relevance to the alleged storage of chemicals or other materials by the petitioners herein in the said premises which storage was alleged to be dangerous to the safety and health ofthe inmates ofthe premises as well as the premises itself. There was no allegation of such storage being likely to lead to infection of any dangerous diseases. 7. There was no allegation of such storage being likely to lead to infection of any dangerous diseases. 7. While the provisions of law cited in the First Information Report are wrong, Sri A. Ramesh, the learned counsel, representing the learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the 2nd respondent represented that the investigating agency is taking steps to correct the mistake and to specify appropriate provisions of law referable and relevant to the allegations made by the 151 respondent in the written report and therefore, it is just and proper that the crime itself need not be quashed while the investigating agency can be cautioned to correct itself. Sri T.M.K. Chaitanya, learned counsel for the petitioners, reserves his right to challenge any such corrected record, if the petitioners are otherwise entitled to do so. 8. Therefore, the Criminal Petition is allowed to the extent of quashing the mentioning of Sections 269 and 270 of the Indian penal Code as the relevant sections of law in the First Information Report in Cr.No. 87/2008 of IV Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam. But the investigating agency is at liberty to specify the appropriate and relevant provisions of law applicable to the allegations made in the written report and proceed with the investigation into the same in accordance with law, while the petitioners are at liberty to defend themselves against all such future action as provided under law.