Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ASHWIN D.BHOBE
Virendranath B. Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
1. This proceeding is recorded in accordance with the decision of this Court in Hema Suresh Ahuja & Ors v. State of Maharashtra & Anr., (2024) SCC OnLine Bom 784 as the subject matter pertains to an offence under the SC/ST Act.
2. Heard Mr. Virendranath Tiwari, Petitioner in person, Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, learned APP for the Respondent – State, and Mr. Rizwan Merchant, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
3. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, together with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed by the Petitioner to quash the FIR bearing No. 121 of 2010 registered at Azad Maidan Police Station, Mumbai (hereafter “impugned FIR”) for offences punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 3(1)(x) and (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereafter “Atrocities Act, 1989"), along with the Chargesheet bearing No. 237/PW/2014 pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 37th Court, at Esplanade, Mumbai (hereafter “Magistrate”), arising from the impugned FIR.
4. The Respondent No. 2 filed a statement dated 02.07.2
FIR under SC/ST Act quashed absent caste-based insult, humiliation intent linked to caste, or cognizable offence ingredients; prior similar vexatious complaints indicate abuse of process for revenge.
The court quashed proceedings under the SC/ST Act due to lack of public view in the alleged incident, emphasizing the need for specific ingredients to establish the offence.
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 emphasized that an FIR under the SC/ST Act requires the humiliation of a SC/ST member to occur in public view; allegations must substantiate a cognizable offense.
Allegations under the SC/ST Act require intentional insult or intimidation in public view; dismissal of revision upholds trial due to sufficient prima facie evidence.
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 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 emphasized that criminal proceedings must be quashed if they lack prima facie evidence, preventing abuse of the judicial process.
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
