ORDER : This petition is filed seeking for quash of the proceedings in Crime No. 185 of 2011 of Atmakur Town Police Station, Kurnool District. 2. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor, who took notice for the 1st respondent. The 2nd respondent has not appeared in spite of service of notice. 3. The counsel for the petitioner contends that the complaint is absolutely devoid of the ingredients of the alleged offences and hence proceeding with the case would be sheer abuse of process of law. A perusal of the complaint, in the foremost would be profitable. It shows that the petitioner himself permitted celebration of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's birthday in the new building of the RTC Bus stand and a portrait of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar was kept in the new building and later it was removed. The complainant alleges that the petitioner is not in favour of having the portrait of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and on the pretext of cleaning the place, he removed the portrait, which was hanged to the wall and the members of the SC & ST Dalit Association went and requested him to restore the portrait to the wall, but the petitioner took it personally and refused to accept their request. It appears that there was a verbal altercation between him and the members of the above Association and the petitioner kept the portrait in a corner, among the abandoned articles and action was sought for against the petitioner for insulting the complainant. 4. The contents of the complaint at a first glance do not make out any offence under Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, as there is no abuse made by the petitioner in the caste name of the members, who approached him, and the allegation is only that by removing the portrait the petitioner insulted the members of the SC & ST Dalit Association. No doubt, that any offensive act, targetting any individual belonging to SC/ST community, would offend the feelings of the community people and it is definitely an insult to each one of them. There are instances where casteist bigots and paid trolls, make demeaning and casteist comments against the under privileged classes. Unfortunately, there occur instances where upper castes resort to abusing Dr. Ambedkar, to show their hatred to schedule castes. There are instances where casteist bigots and paid trolls, make demeaning and casteist comments against the under privileged classes. Unfortunately, there occur instances where upper castes resort to abusing Dr. Ambedkar, to show their hatred to schedule castes. But then, instances where dalits also make an issue out of the normal course of things and precipitate the matter, so that it becomes an outrageous issue, are also not rare. Dr. Ambedkar is one of the framers of the noble document, The Constitution of India. Equality and fraternity has been made the agenda of the Constitution, by being incorporated in the preamble and the preamble is a resolution made by all the people of the country by captioning the words as We the people. If any one citizen forgets the resolution, he has to be taught the importance of the goals set out in the preamble. It cannot be said that any one person or any one section of the Society can own Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. Identifying the great person, who has been the cause of liberation of all the people of India, with any one caste or community, sounds a death knell to the whole theme of the Constitution. Registering any opposition to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, from unintended acts, is also not in the welfare of a healthy and harmonious society. 5. With the above caution in mind, the complaint can be looked into. The contents of the complaint itself show that it was at the instance of the petitioner, that the birthday celebrations of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar took place in the new building. Hence, in the background of the said fact it cannot be said that the petitioner had an intention to insult or injure the feelings of the complainant or Dalits. The celebrations were of the year, previous to the year in which the complaint is lodged. As to when the portrait was removed and as to when the members of the Dalit association approached the petitioner, is not mentioned in the complaint. The answer of the petitioner that he needs permission of the RM, may be taken to understand that things have to go as per the directions of the superiors. It is of common knowledge, that in institutions, more particularly government institutions, decision of everything should come from the proper person. The answer of the petitioner that he needs permission of the RM, may be taken to understand that things have to go as per the directions of the superiors. It is of common knowledge, that in institutions, more particularly government institutions, decision of everything should come from the proper person. Hence the refusal to restore the portrait to the wall cannot be taken as a semblance of the intention of the petitioner to insult the Dalits. It is likely that when a thing is taken up as an issue, some unintended remarks come from the people involved in it. But the overwhelming clue that the petitioner did not intend to insult, comes from the fact that he himself 1-conducted the celebrations, as can be gathered from the opening words of the complaint. By understanding the complaint in the above manner, this court finds it difficult to make out any offence under Section 3(i)(x) of the Act. Hence, any further proceedings would result in abuse of process of law and are hereby quashed. With the above observations, the criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings in Crime No. 185 of 2011 on the file of Atmakur Police Station, Kurnool are hereby quashed. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.