Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
JCD
JUGALBEN SANJAYBHAI PATEL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
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
The FIR lacked essential elements to support charges under the Atrocities Act, leading to its quashing as proceeding would constitute an abuse of process.
The FIR lacked essential elements to support charges under the Atrocities Act, leading to its quashing as an abuse of process.
An FIR under the Atrocities Act is quashed when it lacks essential ingredients necessary to constitute an offence, specifically failing to demonstrate remarks made in public view.
The FIR lacked necessary elements to constitute an offence under the Atrocities Act, as no derogatory remarks or public view were established.
The FIR under the Atrocities Act was quashed due to lack of essential elements, including public view and caste identification.
FIR lacks necessary allegations to establish offences under the Atrocities Act, failing to meet legal requirements of public view and specific derogatory remarks.
To establish an offence under the Atrocities Act, allegations must clearly demonstrate derogatory language used in public view, which was not present in this case.
A FIR can be quashed if it does not disclose a prima facie offence, especially where requirements of public view and derogatory remarks under the Atrocities Act are not met.
The FIR did not disclose sufficient grounds for offences under the Atrocities Act, lacking essential elements such as derogatory remarks and public view.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
