IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Vibha Kankanwadi, J.
James T. George – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Criminal Application No. 969 of 2022
Decided On : 20-06-2022
G.S.Rane, Advocate, B.V.Virdhe, Advocate, M.V.Narwade, Advocate
Proper application of mind is essential in issuing process, and discrepancies in complainant's statements must be duly considered.
Headnote:
Sec. 482 - Challenge to order under Atrocities Act - Sec. 3(i)(g), 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sec. 506 of Indian Penal Code
Fact of the Case:
The applicants, employees of Power Grid, challenged the order of process issuance against them under the Atrocities Act. The complainant alleged abuse and outrage of modesty based on caste, but discrepancies in her statements were highlighted.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the learned Special Judge had not considered the discrepancies in the complainant's statements and the report filed by the police. It emphasized the non-application of mind in issuing process and set aside the order.
Issues: The issues revolved around the complainant's allegations of abuse and outrage of modesty based on caste, discrepancies in her statements, and the non-application of mind by the learned Special Judge.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for proper application of mind in issuing process, citing legal principles from various cases. It highlighted the discrepancies in the complainant's statements and the report filed by the police as crucial factors in setting aside the order.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application, set aside the order of process issuance, and dismissed the complaint against the applicants. It also quantified the fees of the appointed advocate.
JUDGMENT
1. Present application has been filed invoking the inherent powers of this Court under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to challenge the order dtd. 12/2/2022 passed by the learned Special Judge under the Atrocities Act, Ambajogai, Dist. Beed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.26 of 2017, whereby process came to be issued against the applicants for the offence punishable under Sec. 3(i)(g), 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the "Atrocities Act"), Sec. 506 of Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. G. S. Rane for the applicants, learned APP Mr. B. V. Virdhe for the respondent No.1 - State and learned Advocate Mrs. M. V. Narwade for respondent No.2.
3. It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicants that the learned Special Judge had not considered the documents on record, the discrepancies on the face of the contents of the complaint, verification and statement under Sec. 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicants are the employees of Power Grid and there was nothing personal for them to interfere in the property. As per the complaint, the complainant says that she has encroached upon Survey No.484 and has erected a house. Power Grid had undertaken construction of tower near the house of the complainant and for that purpose, various vehicles belonging to the company use the said space. According to the complainant, intentionally the Kaccha road is used by those vehicles though there is a cement road available from the backside of the house of complainant. She had resisted the company vehicles to go from the Kaccha road, however, there is no heat. On 17/5/2017, she had restrained the vehicles of the Power Grid Corporation at about 10.00 a.m. At 10.30 a.m., she says that the accused persons went to the said place and abused her in the name of caste. So also, it is stated that accused Nos.1 and 5 went near her and outraged her modesty by dragging her, holding her hand and given threats to kill.
4. It has been further submitted on behalf of the applicants that in fact initially the complaint was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambajogai, but he had returned it for its presentation before the Special Court under the Atrocities Act. Though she had prayed for investigation under Sec. 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the learned Special Judge, Ambajogai by order dtd. 22/6/2017 had refused to pass such order, but then had put the matter for verification under Sec. 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In her statement under Sec. 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the complainant had come with the case that she was cultivating the land from Gut No.484 and earning from the same. The alleged abuses given in the complaint and her verification are totally different. Thereafter, the matter was sent for inquiry under Sec. 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the report was submitted on 22/2/2018. It was concluded by the Investigating Officer that the present applicants being Non Maharashtrians are unable to speak in Marathi and, therefore, they could not have uttered the abuses that too specific for a particular caste in Marathi. It was then stated that one of the accused Surojkanta himself is a member of Scheduled Caste and, therefore, the offence is not attracted against him. After it was seen that the report of the Investigating Officer is not supporting the complainant, thereafter, the learned Special Judge has conducted the inquiry himself and in the said deposition, the complainant has stated that she resides in Gairan land. She does not say that she was cultivating it. She then states that applicant No.1 had caught hold of her hand and took her away from the place where she had sat on the road obstructing the vehicles going in front of house. She has then stated that the applicant No.1 told that they had purchased the land and then she told that she is res