SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Guj) 205

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.B. Pardiwala, J.
Dhiren Prafulbhai Shah - Appellant
Vs.
State of Gujarat and Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Misc. Application (For Quashing & Set Aside Fir/Order) No. 9976 of 2015
Decided On: 28-01-2016

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Chetan K. Pandya, Advocate
For the Respondents: H.K. Patel, Addl. Public Prosecutor

Important Point- Abuses made against a member of SC/ST community must be made in public view in order to constitute an offence under section 3(1) (ix) and (x) of the SC/ST Act.

Headnote:(A) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989- Sections-3(1)(ix), 3(1) (x)- Intentional insult or intimidation by a person, who is not a member of SC or ST- Insult must be with an intent to humiliate the member of the SC or ST- The incident must occur in any place within the public view- The Act was enacted with a laudable object to protect vulnerable section of the society- The words were not spoken in public view- No case is made out under section 3(1)(ix) or (x) of the Act- Proceedings are gross abuse of the provisions of the Atrocities Act.

       (B) Criminal Procedure, 1973- Section 482- Application For Quashing & Setting Aside Fir/Order- Law is now well-settled that the High Court ordinarily would exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure if the allegations made in the first information report, even if given face value and taken to be correct in their entirety, do not make out any offence-When the allegations made in the first information report or the evidence collected during investigation do not satisfy the ingredients of an offence, the superior courts would not encourage harassment of a person in a criminal court for nothing.

       (C) Principles of Statutory Interpretation- While interpreting any statute, the aspects which need consideration are (i) what was the law applicable before the Act was passed; (ii) what was the mischief or the defect for which the law earlier did not provide; (iii) what was the remedy the Legislature provided; and (iv) the reason for the remedy. The Court is required to adopt a construction which suppresses the mischief and advances the remedy and to add force, life, cure and remedy pitfalls, if any, according to the true intent of the makers of the Act.

       Result- Application Allowed and FIR and Criminal Proceedings quashed and set aside.

JUDGMENT :

J.B. Pardiwala, J.

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Patel, the learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No. 1- State of Gujarat. Mr. Bharda, the learned advocate waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No. 2-original first informant.

2. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant-original accused, serving as a 'Principal' in the 'Vidya Bharti Pharmacy College', situated at the Village-Umrakh, Taluka- Bardoli, District-Surat, seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court praying for quashing of the criminal proceedings, being Special (Atrocity) Case No. 27 of 2015, pending as on today in the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bardoli, arising from the F.I.R. being C.R. No. II-51 of 2015 registered with the Bardoli Police Station, District-Surat, for the offence punishable under Sections-3(1)(ix), 3(1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

3. The case of the prosecution may be summarized as under:--

"3.1 The first informant and his wife were serving as the 'Assistant Professor' with the 'Vidya Bharti Pharmacy College', situated at the Village-Umrakh, Taluka- Bardoli, District-Surat. The College is being run and managed by a Charitable Trust. The said College is recognized by the AICTE, New Delhi. The wife of the first informant joined the service in 2007, whereas, the first informant joined the College in 2006 and was also, the In-charge Principal between March, 2011 to January, 2012. One Shri Dhiren Shah was appointed as the 'Principal' in January, 2012 and thereafter, from November, 2012, the applicant herein took over as the 'Principal' of the College. It is alleged that the applicant in his capacity as the 'Principal' of the College, started harassing the first informant and his wife. It is alleged that in December, 2012, both the husband and the wife were called by the applicant in his chamber and insulted them by uttering words relating to their caste. It is alleged that the applicant herein administered threats that if they would not resign from service, then their life would be made miserable and both would be involved in a false case. It is stated in the F.I.R. that since they were serving in the College, they thought fit not to lodge any F.I.R. as regards the incident alleged to have occurred in December, 2012. It is further stated that thereafter also, the harassment continued and quite frequently, the applicant herein used to utter bad words to the first informant in the presence of the wife of the first informant. It is specifically stated that such words were being uttered at isolated places. It is alleged that deliberately, the first informant and his wife were deprived of the paternity leave and maternity leave and also, the benefits of the Sixth Pay Commission. It is further alleged that keeping personal grudge against the first informant and his wife, memos were also issued by the applicant. It is further stated that the applicant in his capacity as the Principal of the College furnished false information to the management with the intention to get them dismissed from the service. It is stated that the management constituted an inquiry committee to probe into the charges levelled against the first informant and his wife and by order dated 30.04.2015, the first informant was dismissed from service."

4. At the end of the investigation, the Investigating Officer thought fit to file chargesheet against the applicant herein for the offence enumerated as above.

5. The chargesheet consists of the following:--

"(1) Order passed by the Superintendent of Police directing the Deputy Superintendent of Police, SC/ST Cell, Surat Rural to take over the investigation.

(2) First Information Report.

(3) Caste certificate of the first informant.

(4) Scene of offence panchnama.

(5) Arrest panchnama.

(6) Statement of wife of the first informant.

The cha








































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top