The FIR lacked essential elements to support charges under the Atrocities Act, leading to its quashing as proceeding would constitute an abuse of process.

ORDER :

(J. C. DOSHI, J.)

1. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “the Code”), the applicant seek quashing of the FIR registered as C.R.No.11197025200089 of 2020 with Karjan Police Station, Vadodara Rural for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of IPC of the Indian Penal Code read with section 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (“the Atrocities Act” for short) and further proceedings arising thereof.

2. Learned advocate for the petitioners had not pressed petition qua offence punishable under IPC on 12.02.2020. This Court on 12.02.2020 has passed following order :-

“1. Learned advocate for the applicant does not press present application qua offence punishable under IPC.

2. So far as offence alleged under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is concerned, impugned FIR being C.R.No.11197025200089 registered with Karjan Police Station under section 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the SC and ST Act, 1989 lacks basic ingredients of provisions of SC and ST Act, 1989. Therefore, present application deserves consideration.

3. Issue Notice returnable on 11.08.2020. Learned APP wavies service of notice on behalf of respondent State. Meanwhile, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant so far as offence punishable under SC and ST Act, 1989 is concerned. However, investigation may proceed in accordance with law, but charge sheet shall not be filed without permission of the Court. Direct service is permitted.”

2. The brief facts of the case are as under :

2.1. That respondent no.2 has filed the impugned F.I.R. on 29.01.2020 against the petitioner, inter alia, alleging that respondent no.2 is having land situated at Khata No. 194, Old Block No. 457, New Survey No. 564 at Village: Dethal which is of co-ownership of her husband and her sister-in-law. That after the death of her husband, respondent no.2 and her two sons names are entered in the said land. That before about 1 year respondent no.2 and other co-owners decided to sell the said land and the son of respondent no 2 Tribhuvanbhai Prakashbhai contacted original accused no.1 and 2 of the F.I.R. and thereafter the petitioner and her children met the said original accused persons at their office. That the consideration of Rs.40 lacs was agreed and original accused no.1 and 2 called them at Karjan and thereafter, it was stated that they will be paid Rs.1 lacs as down payment. That thereafter, respondent no.2, her sister-in- law Shantaben and her children met original accused no.1 and 2 at Mamlatdar office at Karjan and they were informed that the writing is in form of Banakhat and cash amount of Rs. 1 lacs is to be paid to them. That respondent no.2 was not provided copy of the said document and about 04 months ago her son Tribhuvanbhai came to meet respondent no.2 and told that the sale deed is now to be executed and therefore they have to go to Karjan. Thereafter, the respondent no.2 and her elder son were going to Karjan and Shantaben also came there and original accused no.1 and 2 and his Advocate with present petitioner and told respondent no.2 that cheques of Rs.40 lacs will be given to them. That on writing allegedly prepared by the petitioner, the respondent no.2 and other co owners signed and put their thumb impression and thereafter, registered sale deed was executed before the Sub-registrar on 06.09.2019. That thereafter original accused no. 1 and 2 took respondent no.2 near Civil Court, Karjan and gave 15 cheques and told that these are of Rs. 40 lacs and will be cleared on depositing and the said cheques were kept in the plastic bag. It is alleged that thereafter, respondent no.2 and other co-owners deposited the cheques and they came to know that the said cheques were one year old and were of Rs. 11,62,500/ and not of Rs. 40 lacs. Thus, respondent no.2 was shocked and she talked with her children and it is