IMPORTANT POINT
Criminal proceedings quashed at discharge stage under SC/ST Act and IPC where land deal dispute is civil, no money benefit to accused, and SC/ST offence ingredients absent: no caste-based public humiliation or abuse by caste name.

JUDGMENT :

Heard the parties.

2. The present quashing petition has been preferred to quash the order dated 28.04.2022 passed in SC/ST/GR Case No. 33 of 2017 arising out of Sadar P.S. Case No. 137 of 2017 passed by learned 3^rd Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Exclusive SC/ST(POA) Act, Darbhanga, where learned Exclusive Special Judge for SC/ST (POA) Act rejected the application of the appellants filed under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. for not framing the charge against them for the offence under Sections 409, 420, 419, 504, 506 and 120(B) of the IPC and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.

3. FIR speaks that, Mohan Kumar Mahto (informant) submitted a written information on 07.04.2017 to the Officer In- Charge of Mabbi O.P. (Sadar) police station stating that he was intended to purchase a residential land and in that connection, on 29.3.2016, Md. Reyaz and Md. Rakib Alam approached him claiming they want to sell three kathas of land at Mauza Bishanpur Kalyan @ Gehuni, registered in the names of Rakib Alam and his wife Rehana. After visiting and inspecting the land with Badri Prasad Mahansaria, the consideration amount was settled for ₹28,00,000/- per katha. He paid a total of ₹20,00,000/- through cash and cheques in the names of Rakib Alam and Rehana. An agreement was executed on ₹1,000/- stamp paper on 02.04.2016, signed by Rakib Alam, Rehana, and Reyaz as identifier, in the presence of witnesses. Later, when Mahto asked them to execute the sale deed after arranging the remaining money, they kept delaying, assuring to execute sale deed very soon or to refund with interest. On 09.03.2017 at about 10 PM, Reyaz, Rakib Alam, and five others allegedly came to his house, threatened him at gunpoint, refused both registry and refund, and abused him using caste name. Rakib Alam also allegedly claimed a different identity and confessed involvement in a prior murder. Fearing for his life and family, informant approached police against the accused and also for recovery of his ₹20/- lakh.

4. Aforesaid written report was forwarded to SHO Sadar Police Station and on that basis a formal FIR was lodged which has been registered as Darbhanga Sadar P.S. Case No. 137 of 2017 dated 08.04.2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 471, 386, 387 and 120(B) of the IPC and Sections 3(i)(s), 3(i)(r) and 3(i)(w) of the SC/ST Act. After investigation police submitted charge-sheet no. 487 of 2019 dated 28.08.2019 and thereafter learned Jurisdictional Magistrate took cognizance, accordingly.

5. Mr. Ajay Kr. Thakur, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that at the stage of framing of charge the appellants filed an application for discharge under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. praying therein that no offence under the SC/ST Act or under the IPC made out against them in the present case, as the core issue is land dispute arising out of oral agreement, where petitioner no. 2 was implicated only for the reason as he was witness of the agreement of sale, petitioner no. 3 was implicated being the wife of Md. Rakib Alam. It is submitted that there is no occasion to implicate petitioner no. 2 namely Md. Mehtab Alam @ Md. Mehtab. It is further submitted by Mr. Thakur that even the abuse in the caste name as per FIR is just to aggravate the allegation as to implicate the appellants for the offences punishable under the Sections 3(i)(s), 3(i)(r) and 3(i)(w) of the SC/ST Act.

6. Mr. Thakur, further submitted that as per FIR, only “caste related abuse” was alleged to made during the occurrence without specifying any c