Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
B. Narasimhan & Another - Appellant
Versus
State Rep. by its Assistant Commissioner of Police, Chennai & Others - Respondent
Crl. O.P. Nos. 13082, 12317 & 13366 of 2022 & Crl. M.P. Nos. 7912, 6885 & 7014 of 2022
Decided On : 17-08-2022
Section 482 of Cr.P.C. - Quashing of FIR - Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 1998 - Section 3(1)(r), Section 4 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the allegations under Section 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 1998. It highlighted the legal provisions and their interpretations, emphasizing that the complaints were found to be an abuse of process of law and quashed both FIRs.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved allegations of caste discrimination and harassment between two officers working at the National Institute of Fashion Technology (NIFT). The defacto complainant alleged caste discrimination and filed a FIR under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, while the accused filed a counter FIR under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 1998.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the complaints were a result of misunderstanding and ego between the parties and concluded that both FIRs were an abuse of process of law. It quashed both FIRs and allowed all three criminal original petitions.
Issues: The main issues revolved around allegations of caste discrimination and harassment, and whether the complaints were an abuse of process of law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the complaints were unfounded and amounted to an abuse of process of law, as the allegations did not constitute the offenses under the relevant Acts.
Final Decision: The court quashed both FIRs and allowed all three criminal original petitions.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records in Crime No.164 of 2022 pending on the file of the second respondent police and to quash the same.
Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records in Crime No.165 of 2022 pending on the file of the first respondent police and to quash the same.
Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records in Crime No.164 of 2022 pending on the file of the first respondent police and to quash the same.)
Common Order:
1. Crl.O.P.No.12317 of 2022 and Crl.O.P.No.13082 of 2022 are filed by A1 and A2 respectively to quash the FIR in Crime No.164 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. Crl.O.P.No.13366 of 2022, has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.165 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 1998.
3. It is relevant to note that the defacto complainant in Crime No.164 of 2022 dated 08.05.2022 was the accused in Crime No.165 of 2022 dated 08.05.2022 and A1 in Crime No.164 of 2022 is the defacto complainant in Crime No.165 of 2022.
4. Since the case and counter case are registered against both sides, this Court is inclined to dispose of all the three criminal original petitions by means of this common order.
5. For convenience, the petitions in Crl.O.P.No.13082 of 2022 and Crl.O.P.No.12317 of 2022 seeking to quash the FIR in Crime No.164 of 2022 are taken up first for disposal. The brief facts leading to the filing of the above two petitions are as follows:
(i) The defacto complainant in Crime No.164 of 2022 Mr.K.Ilanchezhian is working as Senior Assistant Director (Administration) at National Institute of Fashion Technology (NIFT), Taramani, Chennai. A1 Dr.Anitha Mabel Manohar was working as the Director of NIFT and A2 Mr.B.Narasimhan was the former Director of NIFT.
(ii) According to the defacto complainant he was working as the Assistant Director in NIFT, Chennai and he was allotted a separate cabin. When the matter stood thus, on 21.09.2020, he was relieved from the work and he was allotted separate room in the hostel by A1 due to caste discrimination as he belongs to Scheduled Castes. After his complaint to the Head Office, the Head Office recommended to permit him to work in his original place.
(iii) Again on 04.01.2022, he was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant Director. However, A1 has not allowed him to work in a regular cabin. On the contrary, he was directed to work in Civil and Electrical Unit. According to him, the above act was done by A1 only based on caste discrimination and she has also given a complaint of sexual harassment. The Internal Committee has also given a report alleging that the allegation of sexual harassment was found to be false.
(iv) According to him, A1 has also made adverse entries in the Performance Appraisal Report and A1 has also asked the defacto complainant to take his car from the car park. According to him, he was not given proper seat in the office and he has also given complaint against A1 for irregularities. According to him, he was discriminated on the basis of caste and therefore, he launched a complaint and thereby a FIR in Crime No.164 of 2022 has been filed for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
6. Brief facts leading to the filing of the Crl.O.P.No.13366 of 2022, seeking to quash Crime No.165 of 2022 is as follows:
(i) According to the defacto complainant Dr.Anitha Manohar, the accused Mr.K.Ilanchezhian was working as Senior Assistant Director and he was constantly harassing the defacto complainant in various forms and not allowing her to perform her duties.
(ii
The main legal point established in the judgment is that unfounded complaints of caste discrimination and harassment can be considered an abuse of process of law and may be quashed under Section 482 ....
The judgment established the importance of prior sanction for public servants under Section 197 of Cr.P.C and highlighted the need to consider the motive behind allegations and the potential for misu....
The court established that adverse remarks in performance evaluations by superior officers do not amount to caste-based harassment under the SC/ST (POA) Act unless there is clear evidence of malice o....
The misuse of the S.C./S.T. Act for personal grievances is impermissible, and allegations must substantiate a prima facie case to avoid abuse of legal processes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for specific details and the need for the insult or intimidation to be made in a place within public view to establish a prima faci....
Point of Law : High Court cannot interfere with investigation in exercise of its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The court held that an allegation of abuse in the name of caste must be supported by evidence and cannot be made as an afterthought or with mala fide intention. The court also held that a delay in lo....
The court quashed proceedings under the SC/ST Act due to lack of public view in the alleged incident, emphasizing the need for specific ingredients to establish the offence.
The defense material must render the allegations redundant for the proceedings to be quashed, and a thorough trial is needed to establish the veracity of the allegations.
The court quashed the FIR against the petitioner, finding no evidence of sexual harassment or conspiracy, emphasizing the lack of mens rea and the frivolous nature of the allegations.
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
