Back
SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Jitender Jatasra – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Moudgil, J.
This petition under Sections 482 CrPC has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of the FIR No.0087 dated 22.04.2021 (Annexure P1) under Section 71 of the Information Technology Act, 2008 and Section 153-A(1)/504/505(2)/120-B IPC and Section 3(1)(r) & (u) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short, ‘the Act’) and Charge Sheet No.1 dated 31.05.2021 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contented that prima facie no case is made out against the petitioner under the SC&ST Act as neither the complainant alleged that his image/prestige was lowered down by the petitioner in public nor there is any mention in the complaint whether the petitioner knew that the complainant belonged to the SC community. It is asserted that in fact the present FIR has been lodged at the instance of Superintendent of Police who has personal grudge against the petitioner because he had leveled corruption charges against the said police officer dated 01.05.2021 (Annexure P4).
3. It is argued that the present FIR has been lodged at the instance of Sh.Vinod Kumar, SP, Charkhi Dadri
Intent and context are crucial in determining the applicability of the SC/ST Act and IPC provisions regarding casteist remarks and public order.
Delay in lodging an FIR raises doubts about its truthfulness; intent to humiliate must be established for SC/ST Act applicability.
The court ruled that allegations of caste-based abuse in public view under the SC & ST Act cannot be quashed without trial, emphasizing the need for intent to humiliate linked to caste identity.
Intent to humiliate must be established for offences under the Atrocities Act; mere airing of content without direct involvement does not constitute an offence.
The court emphasized that an FIR under the SC/ST Act requires the humiliation of a SC/ST member to occur in public view; allegations must substantiate a cognizable offense.
Freedom of speech and expression, as well as the reasonable interpretation of speech in the context of political activism and public discourse.
FIR quashed - Through Facebook ID, posted objectionable material - Religious sentiments - Petitioner has shared post of other person, even, contents of FIR does not, prima facie, establish alleged of....
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
