Allegations under the SC/ST Act must establish intent to insult based on caste, not just membership, and pure civil disputes cannot be criminalized without adequate evidence.

ORDER :

(VENKATESH NAIK, T., J.)

1. The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') praying to quash the further proceedings in Crime No.37/2022 of Kumta Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short, 'IPC') and Section 3(II) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [for short, ‘SC/ST (POA) Act’] pending on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Uttara Kannada, Karwar District.

2. Heard the arguments of Sri.Mahesh Wadeyar, learned counsel for the petitioners-accused, Sri.Abhishek L. Kalled, the learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri.Jairam Siddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.2-State and perused the material on record.

3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under :

Respondent No.1-complainant has filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C., before the learned Sessions Judge, Karwar, against the petitioners alleging that the petitioners are forcefully and illegally entered the place of the complainant’s property, stored mud, and also removed the stones from the compound wall of the complainant. They abused respondent No.1- Complainant in filthy language by taking his caste and also threatened to eliminate him.

4. Hence, he lodged a private complaint before the learned Sessions Judge. In turn, the learned Sessions Judge referred the matter to the jurisdictional Police under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. for investigation and report. Based on the reference complaint, the jurisdictional police registered the case in Crime No.37/2022 for the aforesaid offences and took up investigation. Taking exception to the same, the petitioners have filed this petition for quashement of the entire FIR and complaint.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the allegations made against the petitioners is afterthought, so as to falsely implicate them, there is a delay in lodging the complaint, but delay has not been properly explained by the complainant. The dispute pertains to a survey in respect of the disputed property.

6. Learned counsel places reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of HITESH VERMA v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER, AIR 2020 SC 5584 , (HITESH VERMA) and prayed for allowing the petition.

7. Learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.2-State and learned counsel for respondent No.2-de facto complainant have contended that there is prima-facie material against the petitioners to attract the provisions of the SC/ST (POA) Act. The petitioners intentionally insulted the complainant to provoke his breach of peace and also made criminal intimidation to eliminate him by taking his caste. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

8. On perusal of the private complaint and FIR, it is revealed that, the complainant made allegations that on 02.02.2022 at about 11.00 a.m., accused Nos.1 to 3, took quarreled with the de facto complainant, abused the complainant by taking up his caste, intentionally insulted him to provoke his breach of peace and also made criminal intimidation to eliminate him.

9. Admittedly, the incident occurred on 23.01.2022 and 02.02.2022. The complaint was lodged only on 14.02.2022. Hence, there is a delay of 12 days in lodging the complaint and the delay has not been properly explained by the complainant.

10. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the incident alleged to have been taken place in the house of complainant and it is not at