In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
T.V. NALAWADE & I.K. JAIN, JJ.
Bajirao & Others – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Others – Respondent
Criminal Application Nos. 2803 of 2011 & 6632 of 2014
Decided On : 06-04-2015
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes - Quashing of FIR - Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 482 - Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(x) - Section 3(1)(r) and (s) of the Amendment Ordinance, 2014
Fact of the Case:
The judgment involves two proceedings filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing FIRs against the applicants. The first proceeding relates to an incident where the applicants allegedly assaulted the complainant and others, using caste-based insults. The second proceeding involves an alleged attempt to forcibly take possession of the complainant's land, accompanied by assault and caste-based abuses.
Finding of the Court:
The Court dismissed the applications, holding that the relief sought cannot be granted, and the relevant material should be appreciated by the trial Court.
Issues: The issues revolve around the interpretation and application of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and the Amendment Ordinance, 2014, in the context of the alleged assaults and caste-based insults.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court discussed the interpretation of the term 'within public view' in the context of the offences under the Act, considering various judicial precedents and the wider meaning given by the Apex Court. It emphasized the need for strict interpretation of penal provisions and the importance of literal construction for giving meaning to legal terms.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the applications and vacated the interim relief.
1. Both the proceedings are filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the relief of quashing and setting aside First Information Reports given against the applicants on the basis of which crime is registered mainly for offence punishable under section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) (first proceeding) and section 3(1)(r) and (s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance, 2014 issued in respect of the provisions of the Act. The same learned Counsel argued in both the proceedings of the applicants and as the same point was argued for getting the relief, both the matters are being decided together. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor is heard.
2. In the first proceeding the crime is registered on the basis of report given by one Laxman Bansode. The incident in question took place on 25-6-2011. He has made allegations that at about 4.30 p.m, when he was present in front of his house, applicant Ganesh Deshmukh came in a car near SamajMandir. Ganesh called the complainant towards SamajMandir. According to him, applicant Bajirao was present there and when he reached there, Bajirao gave blows of stick on chest and head. He has made allegations that Ganesh assaulted by using stick. Three more persons participated in the incident to assault the complainant and they had come in the same car. Some persons of the village like Kalidas Bansode, Balaji Bansode rushed to rescue him but these two applicants gave stick blows to those persons also. While giving beating the two applicants were giving abuses to the complainant by taking name of his caste by saying as “HINDI” (Mahara you have become arrogant). He then approached the village Sarpanch and both of them went to police station and gave report. Ganesh is from the same village and Balaji is from Ramnagar, Osmanabad. The crime came be registered for offences under sections 323, 149 etc. of Indian Penal Code and section 3(1)(x) of the Act. Affidavit-in-reply filed by the State shows that injury was sustained by complainant in the incident and there are statements of eye witnesses to the effect that the incident took place at the place described by the complainant.
3. The second proceeding is filed in respect of report given by Smt. Kalawati Kamble in respect of incident dated 25-11-2014. It is her case that they own 8 acres of agricultural land in Nagur and they are personally cultivating this land. It is her case that adjacent to their land in Gat No.78/2 there is no land of Pramod Jawale but Pramod Jawale is trying to forcibly take possession of the portion of the complainant admeasuring 2.1/2 acres. It is her case that due to the dispute they have already approached Court but even when the proceeding is pending, Pramod Jawale has continued to harass them. It is her case that on 25-11-2014 at about 3.00 p.m. when she and her son Kishore were doing work of spraying insecticides on Toor crop, Dinkar Jawale and his son Vinod Jawale came there along with Niladhar Jawale and Tanaji Patil (the applicants). It is her case that they had come with tractor and they wanted to do sowing operation in the land. It is her case that when she said to them that it was her land, Dinkar gave blows of stick to her and three others assaulted her son Kishore by using stick and axe. It is her case that both of them sustained injuries in the incident and Kishore lost few teeth. It is her case that during incident when they raised hue and cry her other son Balaji, daughter-in-law Sangmitra, sister Vachhala, relative Pandurang and others like Pravin Chandanshive and two more persons rushed to the spot. It is her case that while leaving the field these applicants gave threat of life. It is her case that even Balaji was assaulted when he tried to intervene in the incident. On the basis of the report, initially crime came to be register
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.