ORDER :

(J. C. DOSHI, J.)

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of rule for respondent No.1 – State and learned advocate Ms.Nishita Prajapati waives service of rule for respondent No.2.

2. At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Bomi Sethna submits that qua petitioner No.2, the petition has been disposed of as not pressed as per order of coordinate Bench of this Court dated 20.12.2018. He would also submit that petitioner No.1 is not pressing the present petition for offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 506(2), 341, 427 and 114 of IPC and said fact is also recorded vide order dated 20.12.2018. Thus, the petitioner No.1 is pressing this petition only qua offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(w)(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “Atrocities Act”).

3. After reading the FIR, learned advocate Mr.Sethna would submit that since specific word which is said to be derogatory to the first informant on lowering her being member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe is not spoken within public view or intentionally to meet the essential requirement of offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r) of the Atroci