Breach of contract entailing civil consequences is not criminal, and prima facie evidence of caste-based abuse and threats can lead to charges under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

1. This revision is finally heard today.

2. The applicant is aggrieved by the order dated 31.7.2004 passed by Special Judge, (Atrocities, Bilaspur) in special Criminal Case No. 24/2004 whereby charge under Section 420, 294, 506 of IPC and Section 3(1) (x) of the Sheduled Caste and Sheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Hereinafter referred to as the Act) was framed against the applicant.

3. Brief facts are that the applicant herein is alleged to have entered into a contract with one Guman Singh, the complainant to sell land bearing Khasra No. 259/1 measuring 0.37 acres for a sum of Rs. 10,000/-. Under the contract, the applicant is alleged to have received Rs. 6,000/- as earnest money and remaining sum of Rs. 4,000/- on 9.5.2003 before the sub-Ragistrar at the time of the execution of the sale deed. It is alleged that the applicant herein fled from the office of the Sub-Registrar after signing the sale deed and did not appear before the Sub-Registrar. Guman Singh being aggrieved was persistently requesting the applicant herein to execute the sale deed in his favour. It is alleged that on 16.6.2003 Guman Singh accompanied with villagers of village Lamna went to the house of the applicant herein and demanded that he should refund the consideration of Rs. 10,000/- to him. Upon this, the applicant herein is alleged to have abused the complainant Guman Singh filthily by saying and is further alleged to have threatened Guman Singh that he should immediately leave the house or else he would kill him. A written complaint was lodged by Guman Singh on 19.6.2003 before P.S. 'Anusuchit Jati Janjati Kalyan', Bilaspur. After the investigation, the applicant herein was prosecuted under Section 420,294,506 and 3(1)(x) of the Act. By the impugned order, the learned trial Judge framed charge against the applicant under Section 420, 294, 5061PC and 3(1)(x) of the Act.

4. Shri Somnath Verma, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on explanation (9) of Section 415 and a decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Nageshwar Prasad Singh Vs. Narayan Singh) wherein it was held that if under a contract, part of consideration was paid as earnest money and possession was also delivered to the complainant who did not perform his part in making full payment, the liability if any, arising out of such breach of contract was purely civil in nature and not criminal and therefore criminal proceedings under Section 420 IPC were liable to be quashed. It was also contended that the document under Section 173 Cr.P.C. filed by the prosecution did not reveal a prima-facie case under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act. On the other hand, Shri U.K.S. Chandel argued in support of the order dated 31.7.2004 passed by the trial Court.

5. I have heard the rival contentions and have also perused the documents under Section 3(1)(x). It appears from the material produced by the prosecution that the applicant herein refused to perform his part of the contract by fleeing away from the office of the Sub-Registrar and did not appear before the Sub-Registrar even though he had received the full consideration from Guman Singh. Thus, it was a case of breach of contract entailing civil consequences and therefore as held by the apex court in Nageshwar Prasad Singh: S case (supra) charge under Section 420 IPC could not be framed against the applicant herein. So far as the charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act is concerned, there is enough material on record to show prima-facie that in the presence of the villagers, the applicant herein is alleged to have hurled filthy abuses and threats to Guman Singh by taking the name of his caste. It is not disputed by learned counsel for the applicant that Guman Singh is a member of the Scheduled Tribe. In my considered opinion for the purposes of framing charge, prima-facie a case under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act is made out since Guman Singh is alleged to have been humiliated by taking the name of his caste while being