Mr. A. N. Barhate Patil, Advocate for the v. K. Kotecha, APP for

Legal Reasoning

(1) appln-4154-2022.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4154 OF 20221.Babasaheb Chandrabhan Galande,Age: 53 years, Occu. Agri,2.Ajinkya Babasaheb Galande,Age: 32 years, Occu. Agri,3.Parag Babasaheb Galande,Age: 31 years, Occu. Private Service4.Shubham Babasaheb Galande,Age: 26 years, Occu. Private Service, All R/o. Undirgaon, Tq. Shrirampur, Dist. Ahmednagar...Applicants (Orig. accused)Versus1.The State of Maharashtra,Through Police Inspector, Shrirampur PoliceStation, Tq. Shrirampur, Dist. Ahmednagar. 2.Ashok Mahadu Pawar,Age: 37 years, Occu: Labour, R/o. Undirgaon, Tq. Shrirampur,Dist. Ahmednagar....Respondents(Resp. No.2 is Ori. complainant) …Mr. A. N. Barhate Patil, Advocate for the Applicants.Mr. V. K. Kotecha, APP for Respondent No.1.Mr. V. B. Giri, Advocate for Respondent No.2. … CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ. DATED : 20th SEPTEMBER, 2024.ORDER (Per S. G. Chapalgaonkar, J):-1.The applicants have approached this Court under Section482 of the Criminal Procedure Code thereby praying to quash andset aside FIR in Crime No.401/2022 dated 25.10.2022 registeredwith Shrirampur Taluka Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar for (2) appln-4154-2022.odtoffences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 34 of the Indian PenalCode and Sections 3(2)(V-a), 3(1)(r)(s) of Scheduled Caste andScheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 as well asconsequential criminal proceeding pending before Special Court atShrirampur.2.The respondent no.2 lodged report with Shrirampur TalukaPolice Station alleging that on 25.10.2022, he supplied milk atdairy and proceeded to Haregaon. At about 10.10 am while he wasriding on motorcycle bearing Registration No.MH-17-CA-4645 andreached near old Curch, the accused Babasaheb ChandrabhanGalande and his three sons intercepted him and kicked onmotorcycle. They raised assault on him, hit by iron article on hisface and head. Consequently, he sustained injuries. He lostconsciousness. The accused persons did not utter any word orwithout conversation left the spot after raising assault. He hasbeen brought to the Sakhar Kamgar Hospital at Shrirampur.Consequently, the report is lodged. 3On the basis of aforesaid report, Crime No.401/2022 wasregistered against accused Babasaheb Galande and his three sonsfor offences punishable under Section 323, 324 r/w 34 of the IndianPenal Code. The investigation progressed. Finally charge-sheethas been filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class atShrirampur against accused persons with additional offences underSections 3(2)(V-a), 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Caste and ScheduledTribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. along with offencespunishable under Sections 324, 323, 504, 506, 201 r/w 34 of theIndian Penal Code and 4.Mr. Barhate Patil, learned Advocate appearing for theapplicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated inaforesaid crime owing to pending civil dispute between the parties. (3) appln-4154-2022.odtPreviously, complaints have been filed against informant regardingmisappropriation of money of Adivasi community. The contents ofFIR do not show stipulation constituting offence under AtrocitiesAct. Subsequently, such allegations are introduced by way ofsupplementary statement. Even the medical evidence is not inconformity with the allegations in the FIR. Absolutely false andfrivolous report has been filed against applicants. He wouldfurther submit that present FIR is nothing but counter blastagainst FIR lodged by applicant no.1 against Rangnath Dahite andothers as regards to property no.385. The respondent no.2 is in thehabit of filing false criminal cases under Atrocities Act and extractamount from accused persons. Mr. Barhate Patil would submitthat applicant nos.3 and 4 are employed in Information Technologysector. The applicant no.3 is employed as Engineer in PrivateCompany at Bhopal. Although they were not present in the village,they have been falsely implicated as accused. 5.Per contra, Mr. Kotecha, learned APP appearing for therespondent-State and Mr. Giri, learned Advocate appearing forrespondent no.2 vehemently opposes prayers in the applicationcontending that first information report was recorded whilerespondent no.2 was hospitalized. His supplementary statement isrecorded on 31.10.2022, wherein there are specific stipulationattracting offences under Atrocities Act. The falsity of allegationscannot be gone into while considering application under Section482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. They would, therefore, urgeto reject application.6.We have considered submissions advanced on behalf oflearned Advocates appearing for respective parties. We haveminutely gone through the contents of FIR and charge-sheet.Apparently, alleged incident occurred on 25.10.2022 at about 10.10 (4) appln-4154-2022.odtam. The respondent no.2 was treated for injuries at SakharKamgar Hospital, Shrirampur. His statement was recorded whilehe was hospitalized. Consequently, FIR in Crime No.401/2022 hasbeen registered on the same day. Plain reading of FIR shows thatthere are omnibus allegations regarding assault by applicant no.1-Babasaheb Galande and his three sons. The FIR further stipulatesthat since informant suffered head injury, he lost hisconsciousness. All the applicants left the spot without utteringsingle word. Consequently, offence under Section 323, 324 r/w 34of the Indian Penal Code had been registered against BabasahebGalande and his three sons. The investigation progressed andfinally charge-sheet has been filed for offences punishable underSections 324, 323, 504, 506, 201 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Codeand added offences under Sections 3(2)(V-a), 3(1)(r)(s) of theScheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities)Act, 1989. 7.The charge-sheet includes supplementary statement ofrespondent no.2, allegedly recorded on 31.10.2022 in the hospital.The first time reference is made regarding abuses or utterance ofcaste by accused Babasaheb/applicant no.1. Consequently, offencesunder Atrocities Act have been added. The third supplementarystatement of respondent no.2 is recorded on 09.11.2022, whereinagain allegations regarding utterance of caste or abuses referringto caste have been incorporated. Pertinently, entire charge-sheetdo not include statement single eye witness to the incident. Thecontents of FIR do not stipulate any allegation that respondentno.2 was ever abused by accused persons. On the other hand, itstipulates that accused persons left the spot without uttering singleword. In that scenario, supplementary statement recorded afterseven days of incident, wherein first time reference is made (5) appln-4154-2022.odtregarding abuses with utterance of caste cannot be believed. InFIR respondent no.2 states that because of assault, he lost hisconsciousness. If that is correct position, then allegationsregarding utterance or abuses on caste brought after seven days ofincident are palpably false and afterthought. Interestingly,incident occurred in the morning hours at about 10.10 am on apublic road, but none of the witness cited in charge sheet supportscontents of the supplementary statement. Even otherwiseallegation regarding utterance of caste or abuses is omnibus. It isnot discernible from the contents of the supplementary statementthat such utterance was intended to humiliate respondent no.2. 8.In aforesaid background, reference can be made to theobservations of Supreme Court of India in case of Hitesh Vermavs State Of Uttarakhand and another1, which reads thus:-“18. Therefore, offence under the Act is not establishedmerely on the fact that the informant is a member ofScheduled Caste unless there is an intention to humiliate amember of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe for thereason that the victim belongs to such caste. In the presentcase, the parties are litigating over possession of the land.The allegation of hurling of abuses is against a person whoclaims title over the property. If such person happens to be aScheduled Caste, the offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the Actis not made out.” 9.If aforesaid preposition of law is applied in the facts of thepresent case alongwith parameters of law regarding exercise ofjurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code asprescribed in case of State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Ch. BhajanLal and Ors.2, we are of the considered view that no offence underSection 3(2)(V-a), 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Caste and ScheduledTribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 can be made out againstapplicants. Hence, we proceed to pass following order:1(2020) 10 SCC 710.2AIR 1992 SC 604. (6) appln-4154-2022.odtORDERa.Criminal Application is partly allowed.b.The FIR in Crime No.401/2022 dated 25.10.2022 registeredwith Shrirampur Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar as well asconsequential criminal proceeding pending before Special Court atShrirampur is hereby quashed and set aside to the extent ofoffences punishable under Sections 3(2)(V-a), 3(1)(r)(s) of ScheduledCaste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989,however, proceeding to the extent of offences under penal codemay continue against accused in accordance with law.c.Criminal Application is disposed of.(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) (SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI) JUDGE JUDGEDevendra/September-2024