The court ruled that without corroborative evidence, mere allegations are insufficient to establish a prima facie case, particularly under SC ST Act provisions.

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 4^th 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, hugged her and thereby outraged her modesty and abused in a filthy language.

4. On the basis of the said report, the police registered the crime against the applicant. During investigation, the investigating officer has recorded various statements of witnesses and after completion of the investigation, submitted chargesheet against the applicant.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the complainant is suffering from mental illness. Her husband has made various complaints about her. The applicant has also lodged complaints against her regarding her behaviour. Not only statements of witnesses but also statement of her husband shows that it was the complainant who is in habit of raising quarrels with various persons. The statements of nearby residents also disclose that there was only altercation of words between them and no such incident as to outraging of modesty has taken place. Thus, on the basis of false and baseless allegations, the applicant is arrayed as accused in the alleged crime. No prima facie case is made out against the applicant and, therefore, the application deserves to be allowed.

6. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submitted that considering the allegations levelled against the applicant, who has used criminal force against the complainant who belongs to the Scheduled Castes Community and the applicant is not member of the Scheduled Caste Community and, therefore, the offence under Section 3(1)(w)(i) of the SC ST Act is also attracted. The statements of witnesses show that involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. In view of that, the application deserves to be rejected.

7. On hearing both the sides and perusing the entire investigation papers, it reveals that the complainant and the applicant are residing in the same locality i.e. “Nirmal Apartment”. As per the allegations of the complainant, the applicant is having ill-intention about her and due to the said ill-intention, on 25.3.2021, the applicant abused and outraged her modesty by giving hug to her.

8. It is apparent that on 27.3.2021, the wife of the applicant has lodged a report against the complainant alleging that she has abused her as well as her husband. She has also