IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Mandeep Pannu, J.
Mohinderpal Singh - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Punjab And Another - Respondents
CRM-M-26789-2019 (O&M)
Decided On : 16-02-2026
JUDGMENT :
MANDEEP PANNU, J.
1. A petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for seeking quashing of FIR No. 76 dated 06.06.2019 under Section 323 IPC, 1860 read with Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and later on added Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015) vide G.D. No. 36 dated 07.06.2019 registered at Police Station Dinanagar, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur, on the allegations that the same has been wrongly and falsely registered at the manufactured and concocted statement of respondent No.2/complainant Sanjeev Kumar son of Gurdas Mal, resident of Village Kounta, P.S. Dinanagar, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur, in order to tarnish the image and prestige of the petitioner in the eyes of society with malafide intention and political vendetta, and therefore the said FIR (Annexure P-1) is not sustainable in the eyes of law.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that Sanjeev Kumar, son of Gurdas Mal, resident of village Kounta, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur, working as an electrician, got recorded his statement before the police on 06.06.2019 stating that at about 12:00 noon, his son namely Arjun, aged about 6 years, was playing and while playing he entered into the land of Mohinder Pal Singh. At that time, his wife Harjinder was watering the cattle in the Haveli. He further stated that Mohinder Pal Singh was armed with a stick and was beating his son with the said stick and was saying “Kutteo Mahasheo” and that he would not allow them to live near his land. His son started crying loudly and his wife raised alarm to save him. Upon hearing the alarm, the complainant also reached the spot and in his presence Mohinder Pal Singh gave five stick blows to his son, one of which landed on his right wrist, three blows landed on the backside of his body, and one blow landed on his right hip. He further stated that he along with his wife raised alarm shouting “Maar ditta-Maar ditta”, whereupon the accused ran away from the spot while hurling abuses.
3. In continuation thereof, it is pertinent to mention that a DDR was lodged on 07.06.2019. As per the General Diary details, at about 17:30 hours, it was recorded by Inspector/SHO Manoj Kumar that he, along with co-officials, proceeded in connection with inquiry vide rapat No. 28 relating to complaint of FIR No. 76 dated 06.06.2019 registered under Section 323 IPC and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 at Police Station Dinanagar. During the course of inquiry, the complainant of the said FIR appeared before the police station in connection with investigation. From the investigation conducted till that date and from the inquiry, it was found that Mohinderpal Singh son of Darshan Singh, resident of Village Kounta, had used abusive and derogatory caste-based words “Kutteo-Mahasio” against the Scheduled Caste child Arjun while administering beatings and had further stated that he would not allow them to live there. On the basis of these findings, the provisions of Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (as amended in 2015) were added to the case, and special reports were issued and forwarded to senior officers through ASI Gurmej Singh No. 795. The Control Room was informed through wireless message, and a copy of the police file was sent to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dinanagar, for further investigation.
4. The petitioner contends that FIR No. 76 dated 06.06.2019 registered under Section 323 IPC read with Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and subsequently enhanced by addition of Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (as amended in 2015), has been falsely and maliciously lodged by respondent No
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for immediate F.I.R. registration, the significance of reliable evidence, and the burden of proof on the prosecution.
The prosecution must substantiate allegations of caste-based abuse with credible evidence, and delays in complaint filing can undermine the case's integrity.
Child abuse - Household work and beating - Amicable settlement between parties - Rejection of petition to quash criminal proceedings - Outcome of cases which have impact upon society cannot be dispos....
An offence under the SC/ST Act requires evidence of caste-based abuse occurring in public view, which was not established in this case.
(1) Casteist abuses and criminal intimidation – Place of occurrence must be one “within public view” which is a sine qua non for making out offence under SC/ST Act.(2) Quashing of criminal case – Con....
No prima facie case for framing charges under IPC 307 absent life-endangering intention on non-vital injuries; SC/ST Act inapplicable sans public-heard caste slurs, corroboration, amid rivalry and FI....
The court quashed the charge sheet due to lack of evidence and found the accusations to be motivated by political vendetta, highlighting the importance of protecting individuals from retaliatory lega....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.