( 1 ) THIS reference has been made consequent upon a difference of opinion on the interpretation of the expression public view in Section 3 (l) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the Act or SC/st Act ), in the Division Bench of this Court, consisting of hon ble Mr. Justice B. A. Khan and Hon ble Mr. Justice V. S. Aggarwal (as His lordship then was), while hearing the petition seeking quashing of the First information Report (for short fir ) under Section 3 (l) (x) of the Act against them. Brief resume of facts, necessary for appreciation of the controversy, are as follows:

( 2 ) PETITIONERS and complainants are neighbours residing in the same complex at Vikaspuri Extension, Delhi. On 14. 3. 2001 there was some dispute amongst them, which resulted in registration of two cross cases on 28. 3. 2001. One under Section 3 (l) (x) of the Act against petitioners and other under Sections 354/34 of the Indian penal Code, against the complainant and some witnessesof earlier case. Prosecution case is that on 14. 3. 2001 Babu Lal (since deceased) resident of flat No. 2-A, Vikaspuri lodged a report to the police