M. NAGAPRASANNA
V Jagadish Bathija Son Of Vashdevdas – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
Petitioners are before this Court calling in question registration of Crime in Crime No.70 of 2023 for offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.
2. Heard Sri P.P. Hegde, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for the State. Respondent No.2-Complainant though served, remains unrepresented.
3. Sans details, facts in brief, are as follows:
Petitioners are the owners of a premises located in Flat No.42, Tower-6, Pebble Bay, No.74, 1st Main Road, RMV 2nd Stage, Dollars Colony, Bangalore -560 094. Petitioners desirous of letting the said premises on rent and the second respondent – complainant desirous of taking the premises on rent enter into a rental agreement on 21.06.2018, per month for usage of the said premises and Rs.16,461/-as maintenance directly payable to the Pebble Bay Owners’ Association. A security deposit of Rs.10/-lakhs was paid to the petitioners to be returned interest free. It transpires that towards the Rs.10/-lakhs security deposit, two cheques were handed over by the complainant one for Rs.3/-lakhs and another
Ashabai Machindra Adhagale v. State of Maharashtra
Director of Public Prosecutions v. Humphrys [1977 AC 1: (1976) 2 WLR 857: (1976) 2 All ER 497 (HL)]
Gorige Pentaiah v. State of A.P.
HITESH VERMA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND reported in 2020(10) SCC 710
Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India
The court reaffirmed that criminal proceedings cannot be initiated based solely on civil disputes; the FIR was quashed due to lack of substantive allegations of a crime under the relevant laws.
A complaint under the Atrocities Act filed after substantial delay lacks merit and may be quashed if it does not present a prima facie case.
Insufficient grounds for charges under the Atrocities Act were identified, as the allegations did not satisfy requisite legal conditions.
Insults under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act require public visibility and an intent to humiliate; mere civil disputes do not qualify as offences under this Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.