Delay in lodging an FIR raises doubts about its truthfulness; intent to humiliate must be established for SC/ST Act applicability.

ORDER :

1. Quashing of an FIR No.258/2017 dated 22.12.2017 lodged at Police Station Kotwali Churu, for the alleged offences under Sections 153(A) of IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(u) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is sought herein.

2. Briefly speaking, relevant facts of the case are that one Ashok Panwar lodged a police complaint alleging therein that he saw an interview of two film actors i.e. Salman Khan and Shilpa Raj Kundra (petitioner herein) on T.V., wherein they used word "Bhangi". Said word allegedly hurt the sentiments of the people belonging to the Valmiki community. Basis thereof, FIR in question was registered and investigation ensued.

2.1 It is stated that the Investigating Officer issued notices/letters dated 18.01.2018 and 15.02.2018 to the accused/petitioner to appear/present herself at the jurisdictional police station.

2.2. The above said notices were duly replied by the petitioner stating, inter alia, the FIR itself does not reflect commission of any cognizable offence. Hence continuance of further proceedings in the impugned FIR is abuse of process of law, but to no avail. Thus this petition.

3. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the case file and perused the contents of the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that, admittedly, the purported interview resulting in the impugned FIR was recorded in the year 2013. Whereas, FIR was belatedly lodged by the respondent no.2 on 22.12.2017 i.e. after more than 3 years. It is a settled proposition of law that unless the delay in FIR is explained, it is per se fatal.

4.1. Furthermore, he points out that offences under Sections 3(1) (r)(u) invoked in the impugned FIR were incorporated in the statute book vide SC/ST Amendment Act, 2015 (No.1 of 2016) (w.e.f. 26.01.2016). Concededly, the so called offending TV interview was shot and telecasted in the year 2013. The impugned FIR came to be lodged in the year 2017 alleging offences under Sections 3(1)(r)(u), ibid. Meaning thereby, the said sections were not even in existence at the time of the alleged interview. Hence, the Petitioner cannot be tried under any of the above mentioned offences by invoking non existent section.

4.2. He would argue that not only the delayed FIR raises doubts of embellishment, but even otherwise no offense is attracted under Section 153A IPC. There are no allegations or evidence of intent to promote enmity between groups, nor was requisite government sanction obtained under Section 196 Cr.P.C.

4.3. The SC/ST Act also does not apply, as the alleged remarks lack intent to humiliate based on caste. It is thus contended that the FIR is legally untenable and constitutes an abuse of process.

5. At the outset, Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and states that no interference by this Court is required and law will take its own course. He would canvass that, if after investigation any incriminating material is unearthed criminal culpability will be fastened only then. Conversely, he would urge that a negative final report will be filed in case it is found that no offence has been committed.

6. I shall now proceed to deal with the rival contentions and render my opinion thereupon by recording reasons/discussion in the succeeding paragraphs vis-a-vis analysis of the penal section invoked by the prosecution.

6.1 At the very outset, I am unable to persuade myself with the stand taken by learned Public Prosecutor and am in agreement with the aforesaid arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner. Reasons are not far to seek. Let us see how.

7. Perusal of the FIR reveals that even if the contents thereof are taken as gospel, none of the sections invoked therein are attracted. Ex facie the allegations and the narrative of the complainant lack the quintessential ingredients for commission of the purported