1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner-complainant against the order dated 22nd March, 2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby respondents No. 2-10 herein, who were charge-sheeted by the police for the commission of the offences punishable under Section 3(i)(x), (xi) & (xv) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1989 and Sections 323/341/354/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), were discharged in respect of the offence under the Act of 1989 while in respect of the IPC offences alleged to have been committed by the accused persons the case was remanded back to the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate for consideration since all those offences were triable by the Court of a Magistrate.

2. The relevant portions from the impugned order where the allegations which were leveled against the respondents 2-10 in the FIR and then in the charge-sheet submitted in Court have been noticed as well as the observations of the learned trial Judge are being re-produced below:-

The case of the prosecution is that on 3-5-2008 all the above accused persons had obstructed, molested and used objectionable caste related remarks against the complainant Ms. Kanaklata aged about 30 years, her sister Manorama aged 29 years and brother Chander Bhusan aged 27 years who, were the tenants under the accused persons. It is further alleged that the accused persons had caused simple injuries to the complainant Kanaklata who are belonging to Scheduled Caste category (Chammar). As per the allegations of the complainant they have been the tenant under the accused persons and had been regularly making payment of monthly rent charges and previously there was no dispute but of-late the landlord stopped their water and when the complainant objected to the same he used caste based remarks. The remarks so attributed to the accused persons are as under:-

1. Sale Chamaroon tum logon ne humse apni jaati chipiai aur hamara ghar aur pani aur hume chhu-chhu kar apavitra aur bhrast karte rahe ho.

2. Haramzadoon dogule ki auloodon ya to hamara ghar khali karo varna hum thymhare saath vo karenge ki tumhare ghar vale kisi ko muh dikhane ke layak to rahenge hi nahin tumhari bootiyan bhi nahin milengi.

3. Kutiya chamari teri himmat kaise hui hamara nal chhu kar hamara dharma bhrast karne ki. Doogli ke aullaudon ya to aaj apna samaan uthakar yahan se niklo varna aaj ki raat hum apne logon ko bula kar tumhara samuhik balatkar karenge aur tum teeno bhai behnoon ki boti-boti katkar aise jaghe thikane lagayenge ki tumhara pura khandaan dhundhta reh jayega. Abhi tum harmari taakat ko nahin jaanti.

Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the accused persons has drawn the attention of this Court to DD No. 22-A which is the first complaint given by the complainant Ms. Kanaklata on which the signatures made by her at the bottom have been torn. Ld. Counsel submits that these signatures have been deliberately torn by the complainant and the specific allegations under the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 have been mala fidely inserted thereafter as an after thought on legal advise.

The investigating Officer was directed to furnish his explanation with regard to the DD No. 22-A where the signatures of the complaint was torn. In pursuance to the aforesaid direction ASI Roshan Lal has furnished his clarification and explanation in writing. In his explanation ASI Roshan Lal has submitted that on 4-5-2008 the at about 11:00 am the complainant came to the police station at Mukherjee Nagar and made her statement before him and in her statement she had not leveled any allegation regarding Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the accused persons and after that the complainant was talking to Media Persons and one Mr. Ashok Bharti on telephone and thereafter she suddenly tore the paper where the complainant had signed. The