Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, ROHIT W. JOSHI, JJ
Afshamaskar Laikhkan Pathan, @ Afsha Firdos Ujede – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
1. The applicants, in the present matter, are arrayed as accused in First Information Report No. 0309 of 2022 registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station, District Latur on 12.07.2022 for the offences punishable under sections 376, 376(2) (n), 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’ and ‘Atrocities’ Act, respectively, for the sake of brevity).
2. The principal accused in the matter is one Arafat Laikhkan Pathan against whom allegations in relation to Section 376 and 376(2)(n) of the IPC are leveled. The present applicants are relatives of accused No.1 Arafat. The allegations against them are pertaining to Section 323, 504 and 506 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1) (s) and 3(2)(va) of the Atrocities (3)Act.
3. Respondent No.2 is the informant. She has alleged that she was running a garment shop in shop No. A-6 which was taken on rent from applicant No.7 (Dr. Khayyum Pathan). The adjoining shop was being run by accused No.1. She claims that over a period of time, she develop
The court clarified that for offences under the Atrocities Act, allegations must occur in public view, and prosecution can be quashed in part based on the sufficiency of evidence.
The court emphasized that for offences under the Atrocities Act, the alleged insult must occur in public view, which was not established in this case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that if the allegations in the FIR do not prima facie constitute a case against the accused, the proceedings can be quashed.
case against the applicants in both these matters do not fall within the category of being an exceptional case where the inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. could be exercised in favour of t....
The judgment establishes the principle that the court can quash criminal proceedings if they are manifestly attended with mala fide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive, as per the guid....
The court quashed the FIR and proceedings under the Atrocities Act, finding no prima facie case against the applicant and emphasizing the need to prevent abuse of legal processes.
The absence of public view during the alleged incident and lack of independent witnesses led to the quashing of the FIR under the Atrocity Act and IPC.
The main legal point established is that for an offence under the SC ST Act, the alleged acts must occur in a place within public view, as per the judicial pronouncements and legal provisions cited.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for specific details and the need for the insult or intimidation to be made in a place within public view to establish a prima faci....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
