High Court
Legal Reasoning
cria-1092.241 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1092 OF 2024Jabbarkhan S/o Yasinkhan Pathan,Age-62 years, Occu:Pensioner,R/o-Labour Colony, Murud, Taluka and District-Latur -413510 ...APPLICANT VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Murud Police Station, Taluka and District-Latur,2) X Y Z (Complainant) ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr. G.R. Syed Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S.A. Gaikwad, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1. Mr. R.N. Bhapkar Advocate for Respondent No.2, appointed through Legal Aid. ... CORAM: SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE : 20th MARCH, 2025 ORDER [PER SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.] :1.Present Application has been filed for quashing theproceedings in Special Case No.40 of 2024 pending before theSpecial Judge under the Atrocities Act, Latur arising out of the cria-1092.242first Information Report (for short “the FIR”) vide Crime No.42 of2024 registered with Murud Police Station, Taluka and District-Latur on 31st January 2024, for the offence punishable underSections 354-C, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section3(1)(w)(ii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the charge-sheet No.20of 2024. 2.Heard learned Advocate Ms. Syed for Applicant, learnedAPP Mr. Gaikwad for respondent No.1 and learned Advocate Mr.Bhapkar appointed through Legal Aid to represent the cause ofrespondent No.2. 3.Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that even aftertaking into consideration the contents of the FIR and thestatements of the witnesses it can be seen that ingredients ofthose offences are not attracted. In fact the husband of theinformant appears to be behind the FIR. The present applicanthad extended hand loan to the husband of the informant and itwas to the extent of Rs.38,100/-. Present applicant had filedRegular Civil Suit No.752 of 2021 before the Court of learned 5thJoint Civil Judge Junior Division, Latur, which came to be decreed cria-1092.243on 3rd February 2023. The husband of the informant was directedto pay sum of Rs.27,100/- within a period of three monthstogether with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 7th May2019, till actual recovery of the said amount. The applicant hadthen filed Execution Petition i.e. Regular Darkhast No.21 of 2023against the husband of the informant. The notice was issued tothe Judgment Debtor by order dated 3rd April 2023. For servingthe said notice the present applicant had gone along with theBailiff. The applicant had only identified the location of the houseof the Judgment Debtor. However, the informant and herhusband had beaten the applicant and abused him in filthylanguage, for which he had filed Non-cognizable report with thesame police station. Now, as per the FIR, the incident is allegedto have taken place on 7th October 2023, but the FIR has beenlodged on 31st January 2024. There is no plausible explanationgiven by the informant. Therefore, there is evidence on recordwhich will show that the FIR has been lodged with ulteriormotive, at the instigation of the husband and to avoid therepayment of the loan amount and the decretal amount by thehusband. 4.Per contra, learned APP and learned Advocate Mr. Bhapkar cria-1092.244appointed through Legal Aid to represent respondent No.2, havestrongly objected the application and submitted that perusal ofthe charge-sheet would show that the incident is witnessed bythe husband and there are other witnesses to whom immediatedisclosure is made. The informant by birth, is a member ofscheduled caste, however, she has married to a Muslim personbut still when a lady member of scheduled caste is sexuallyharassed, then certainly it would be an offence under the SpecialEnactment.5.The contents of the FIR would show that informant gotmarried to Muslim person on 31st August 2007. It appears thatshe has changed her name also and accordingly Adhaar Cardwas prepared. The contents of the charge-sheet would show thatthere was Gazette Publication in respect of the same. However,what is missing, is the details in respect, whether before themarriage the informant had converted to Islam. She has onlystated that she had performed love marriage, but she has notdisclosed, what was the mode of marriage i.e. whether underSpecial Marriage Act or by undergoing rites under the MuslimLaw. For undergoing the ceremony under the Muslim PersonalLaw, she ought to have converted herself. Even the Gazette cria-1092.245which she has produced, reflects that it is in respect of change ofname, age and conversion to different religion. In the saidGazette Publication, it is not stated whether it was only onaccount of change of name or even because of change in thereligion. The necessary details have not been given. Now, evenafter the change of name, she has filed the FIR in her old name.Thus, it appears that she wants to use the caste certificate whichshe had obtained in her name on 6th July 2000. Therefore, thereis basically a question-mark as to whether she is really memberof scheduled caste on the date of incident.6.The informant has not given the details as to since whenthe applicant was knowing her. Knowledge of the accusedregarding the caste of the informant is necessary ingredient toattract Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.7.The informant states that her husband is handicapped byhands and legs. What is the percentage of the disability is notstated, neither during the course of investigation the disabilitycertificate of the husband of the informant has been collected.But then respondent No.2 states that the husband had gone cria-1092.246outside around 8.30 a.m. on 7th October 2023. When she waschanging clothes after bath around 8.45 a.m., the applicantentered the house and taking disadvantage of the fact that herhusband had gone outside the house, he tried to manhandle theinformant when she was in semi nude condition. She also statedthat even the applicant had tried to commit rape on her. Then itis stated that the applicant told her that her husband owes anamount of Rs.2,00,000/- to him and that should be given backto him and till she does not give that amount, after utteringabuses in the name of the caste, it was told that she should keepphysical relations with him. The informant then says that shecried for help and at that time her husband came. The husbandwas trying to push the applicant but the applicant kicked herhusband, as a result of which he fell down. Then her husbandgave phone call to Murud Police Station and then the applicantfled away from the place by abusing her in filthy language andgiving threats.8.Here, it is to be noted that at one place the informant saysthat her husband had given a phone call to Murud Police Stationat that moment itself, then the question is, why the Police hadnot arrived and why she had not lodged any FIR with the Police cria-1092.247Station immediately. Interesting point to be noted is that forexplaining the delay of about three months, the informant statesthat since the applicant was known to her husband, the husbandtold that he would give advice to the applicant. This reaction istotally indigestible. If there was an attempt to commit rape onthe wife, the husband will not keep quiet and would not say thatsince he knows the accused he would give him understanding.There is absolutely no plausible reason given for lodging the FIRbelatedly. The FIR is totally silent on the point of hand loan takenby the husband and decree passed against him by the CivilCourt. 9. Now, in his statement under Section 161 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure, the husband stated that the applicant wasserving as clerk in Collector Office, who was running a typinginstitute at Murud. The husband had worked for about threeyears with the applicant and in that period the applicant hadgiven him promise to secure a job for him. Husband then saysthat his father had given amount of Rs.3,00,000/- for securingjob for him from handicapped category in Collector Office. Whenhe could not get the job, he asked the applicant to repay theamount but it was not given. But then he says that some amount cria-1092.248of loan was given with the help of applicant under some schemesby the Social Welfare Department, for which the applicant stoodas guarantor. Husband further states that he could not repay theloan and therefore the Bank had deducted an amount ofRs.27,000/- from the salary of the applicant, which the applicantwas demanding from him. The husband was not having theamount and therefore, the applicant had lodged the Civil Suitagainst him. Thus, here the husband discloses about financialtransactions between him and the applicant. He then states thatthe applicant used to give threat that he would sell the house ofthe husband and would recover the amount and for that purposehe used to give threats to him and the informant for vacating thehouse. This is the background that has been given, but hisstatement is also silent on the point, whether the informant hadconverted to Islam prior to the marriage and how this fact wasknown to the applicant that informant is originally member ofscheduled caste. 10.As regards the delay, the husband gives the sameexplanation. Though he says that immediately after he hadcontacted the Police, the applicant started running and abusedhis wife and thereupon he made inquiry regarding the incident cria-1092.249and asked the wife as to what had happened. At the cost ofrepetition, we would say that the explanation that in spite ofhappening such an incident, he had tried to give understandingto the applicant, is not plausible.11.The FIR is an outcome of vengeance and it is tainted withmala fides, lodged belatedly and therefore, this is a fit casewhere we should exercise our powers under Section 482 of theCode of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the FIR and thefurther proceedings. Hence the following order:- O R D E R(I)The Application stands allowed.(II) The proceedings in Special Case No.40 of2024 pending before the Special Judge under theAtrocities Act, Latur arising out of the firstInformation Report vide Crime No.42 of 2024registered with Murud Police Station, Taluka andDistrict-Latur on 31st January 2024, for the offencepunishable under Sections 354-C, 323, 506 of theIndian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(w)(ii) of the
Legal Reasoning
cria-1092.2410Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and thecharge-sheet No.20 of 2024, stands quashed andset aside as against the applicant - JabbarkhanS/o Yasinkhan Pathan. [SANJAY A. DESHMUKH] [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI] JUDGE JUDGE asb/MAR25