Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
Urmila Joshi-Phalke, Nandesh S.Deshpande
Amol s/o Dayaram Jadhav – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, through its SDPO/Police Station Officer – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.
1. Heard learned counsel Shri V.Gokhale for the applicant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mrs.Shamsi Haider for non-applicant No.2/State, and learned counsel Mrs.Archana Murrey appointed for non- applicant No.2 (the complainant). Admit. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present application is preferred by the applicant under Section 482 of the CrPC for quashing of FIR in connection with Crime No.296/2021 registered under Sections 294 , 341 354, and 354-A of the IPC and under Section 3(1)(w)(i) of the The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (the SC ST Act) and consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing Special Case No.113/2021 pending before learned 4th District Judge-2 and Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal.
3. Brief facts of the prosecution case emerge for the police papers, are as under:
The FIR is lodged by the complainant alleging that she came from market to her residence on 25.3.2021. At about 4:30 pm, the applicant stopped her vehicle by using both of his hands and abused in a filthy language. Thereafter, at the parking, he, with an ill-intention, hugg
The court ruled that without corroborative evidence, mere allegations are insufficient to establish a prima facie case, particularly under SC ST Act provisions.
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 court ruled that allegations of caste-based abuse in public view under the SC & ST Act cannot be quashed without trial, emphasizing the need for intent to humiliate linked to caste identity.
The court established that allegations of sexual harassment against the applicants were baseless and lacked credible evidence, thus quashing the FIR.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the need to prevent the misuse of the provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and to discourage dis....
The court affirmed that a prima facie case must be established for framing charges, emphasizing that quashing of FIRs should be rare and only in exceptional circumstances.
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
