Oral Judgment:

The present application is filed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dated 15.9.2000 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chalisgaon in Regular Criminal Case No. 227/1998.

2. It is the case of the applicant that he is Chairman of the Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Chalisgaon. An employee named Shri.Ananda Shenpadu Sonwane was dismissed from the services for absence from the duties and certain misconduct. The said employee approached to the Labour Court, but he was not granted any relief. He had also filed a complaint under the Schedule Castes & Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for brevity) but that was subsequently dismissed by the learned Special Court, Jalgaon.

3. It is the case of the applicant that thereafter, the mother and wife of Shri.Ananda Shepadu Sonwane alongwith one Mr.Namdeo Jadhav met the applicant in his house and requested to reconsider his case sympathetically. The applicant replied that if the application for condoning his lapses is filed and if the legal proceedings are withdrawn, his case can be considered sympathetically.

4. It is the case of the applicant that the advocate Shri.Ananda Shenpadu Sonawane, viz Shri. Mahadu Dhondu More filed a complaint under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, alleging that the petitioner had uttered the words in respect of him as "Tinpat", "Nalayak" and "Halkat".

5. It is the further case of the applicant that on the basis of these allegations, the respondent No. 2, original complainant, filed case before the Special Court, Jalgaon. It was ultimately transferred to Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chalisgaon.

6. It is contended that the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chalisgaon issued the process under section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 r/w. 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

7. It is further contended that the respondent No. 2, original complainant, was convicted by this Court under section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 in "Shlini Bhimrao Gaikwad Vs. Advocate M.D.More, (2002 (2) Mah.L.J. 677)". The respondent No. 2, original complainant, is practicing as an advocate at Chalisgaon. The Bar Association of Chalisgaon unanimously passed a resolution whereby it was stated that the Respondent No. 2, original complainant, is filing several cases under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against Judges, Police Officers, Government Officers, Advocates and other respectable persons, therefore, the Bar Council and other authorities may be requested to take appropriate action against him.

8. Onthe basis of aforestated facts, the present petitioner has filed this application for quashing the issuance of process against him and also for grant of anticipatory bail.

9. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the applicant at the time of filing of this application was of 72 years old, by this time, he is 80 years old. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in public life since last more than 40 years, he is involved in political activities, he is respectable person in the society, the filing of the complaint by the complainant is abuse of process of law. It is further submitted that the complaint under section 3(1)(X) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheducled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is not made out. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the complainant’s case is that the alleged incident took place inside the house of the present applicant. It is further submitted that the requirement of section 3(1)(x) of the Act is that the incidence of insult or intimidation has to occur in a place accessible to and in the presence of the public. The presence of both these ingredients would be absolutely necessary to constitute the offence under the