The court upheld the FIR under the SC & ST Act, affirming that allegations of caste-based violence and abuse constituted a prima facie case, rejecting the petitioners' claims of falsehood.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing/deleting Section 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short ‘the SC & ST Act’) in FIR no. 108 of 2023, dated 11.12.2023 registered in Police Station Rakkar, Tehsil Rakkar, District Kangra and consequent proceedings arising out of the FIR.

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the informant made a complaint to the police asserting that she was proceeding towards Hamirpur in her Scooty on 10.12.2023 at about 5:00 pm. She found that the petitioners had damaged the road leading to her house after entering her land. The informant objected. The petitioners touched her inappropriately. The petitioners attacked her with a Shovel (Jhamb). The informant called her family members. Her parents, brother and sister-in-law reached the spot. The petitioners gave them beatings. The petitioners abused them by the name of their caste. The informant and her family members sustained injuries in the incident. The police registered the FIR and conducted the investigation.

3. Being aggrieved from the registration of the FIR, the petitioners have filed the present petition. It has been asserted that the allegations levelled against the petitioners are false. No remarks were made by the petitioners. The informant or her family members do not belong to the scheduled caste. Their caste has been mentioned as Falehra Attri and Falehra Jasau in the Shajra Nasab, which are not scheduled castes. The informant’s family illegally managed to change their caste in other records.The allegation regarding the caste is vague and false, and no case is made out for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 3(1)(s) of the SC & ST Act. The petitioners are retired Government servants, and they enjoy a good reputation in the society. The petitioners had also lodged an FIR no. 107 of 2023 dated 10.12.2023 against the informant. Therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(s) of the SC & ST Act be deleted from the FIR.

4. I have heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent/State.

5. Mr. Ashok Kumar Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated. There is no material on record to connect them with the commission of the crime. The informant’s caste is not mentioned in the list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes issued by the State Government. Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and Section 3(1)(s) of the SC & ST Act be ordered to be deleted.

6. Mr Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State, submitted that the FIR clearly mentioned that the petitioners had abused the informant in the name of her caste. They had obstructed her from proceeding further. They also gave beatings to her and her family members. The caste Falehra is mentioned in the list of the Scheduled Caste.Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

7. I have given considerable thought to the submissions made at the bar and have gone through the records carefully.

8. The law relating to quashing of FIR was explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.N. John v. State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 7 as under: -

“7. As far as the quashing of criminal cases is concerned, it is now more or less well settled as regards the principles to be applied by the court. In this regard, one may refer to the decision of this Court in State of Haryana v. Ch. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, wherein this Court has summarized some of the principles under which FIR/complaints/criminal cases could be quashed in the following words:

“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of