Point of Law : In the light of the analysis made above and as appellants have failed to point out any illegality, infirmity or perversity in the impugned order.

Headnote:
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 14-A (1) - Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 323,504,506,325 – Offence of voluntarily causing hurt – Charged - First Informant was a resident of Village - At about 08 a.m., when he (informant) along with his father, brothers s/o Punu Ahirwar was going on his tractor-trolly to upload bricks, on the way, appellants and other co-accused persons, , who are residents of Village-, had intercepted, insulted, intimidated and abused them by using caste indicative words, were saying that why are you going to upload bricks and why you do not go to do our job - Thereafter, with common intention, they beat them with kicks, fists & sticks and after threatening them, they ran away from the spot, as a result, complainant/informant's side sustained grievous injuries and thereafter treatment were given to them at District hospital, from where looking to seriousness of victims were referred to Jhansi Medical College and given treatment - When they returned their home, lodged instant FIR bearing No - Whether in facts of this case, impugned order and criminal proceedings under SC/ST Act can be quashed on basis of compromise between parties - Powers were exercised by Hon"ble Supreme Court under Article 142 to quash criminal proceedings with sole objective of doing complete justice between parties before it - However, in this case there is neither any cogent reason nor any travesty of justice being caused or any abuse of process that needs to be prevented thus warranting the exercise of inherent jurisdiction of Court. [Para 28]
Finding of Court: In instant case, what appears is that humiliation of Victim/First Informant side was totally unprovoked, uncalled for, with sole intention of humiliating victim for not doing their job - Offence in instant case was preceded by a criminal intent of humiliating victim on basis of his caste and has been committed solely and consciously on account of caste of victim - Furthermore, having regard to legislative intent underlying SC/ST Act to deter acts of indignity, humiliation, and harassment against members of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes, and facts in instant case, compromise does not indicate settlement of any civil dispute and possibility of First Informant side being coerced to enter into compromise cannot be ruled out as appellant No.2 has criminal history of two cases and appellant no.4 has criminal history of 14 case, which is evident from para 19 of criminal appeal - There is no rationale as to why continuation of legal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law - Therefore, the offence in instant case being not of a pre-dominantly civil nature and being committed solely on basis of caste of victim, rigours of SC/ST Act being a Special statute, enacted with a specific noble legislative intent that must be given effect in its letter and spirit, cannot be diluted by quashing Criminal Proceedings in question on basis of compromise.

Result : Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT :

1. The present Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the "SC/ST Act") on behalf of the appellants praying for setting aside impugned order dated 16.01.2023 passed by ADJ/Spl Judge SC and ST, Lalitpur in S.S.T.No.260/2018 (State vs Jandail Singh and others) arising out of case crime No.41 of 2018 u/s 323,504,506,325 IPC and 3(1)(r),(s) of ST/ST Act PS-Jakhlaun, District Lalitpur.

2. As per the FIR, the prosecution story is as follows: The First Informant Puran s/o Kanchhedi Ahirwar was a resident of Village Nunawali. On 10.04.2018, at about 08 a.m., when he (informant) along with his father Kanchhedi, brothers Tilak and Ajay and Bhadai s/o Punu Ahirwar was going on his tractor-trolly to upload the bricks, on the way, appellants and other co-accused persons, namely, Jaidan Singh s/o Lakhan Singh, Mukund singh s/o Lakhan singh, Bablu s/o Sammar Singh and Lakhan Singh s/o Dev Singh Thakur, who are residents of Village-Nunawali, had intercepted, insulted, intimidated and abused them by using caste indicative words, were saying that why are you going to upload the bricks and why you do not go to do our job. Thereafter, with common intention, they beat them with kicks, fists & sticks and after threatening them, they ran away from the spot, as a result, complainant/informant's side sustained grievous injuries and, thereafter treatment were given to them at District hospital, Lalitpur, from where looking to the seriousness of the victims namely, Kanchhedi and Tilak were referred to Jhansi Medical College and given treatment. When they returned their home, lodged the instant FIR bearing No.0041 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 325 IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of ST/ST Act PS Jakhlaun, District Lalitpur.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the appellants and Complainant/Respondent No. 2 are known to each other and are neighbours. It is submitted that due to some misunderstanding the quarrel took place between them, however, there was no intention to hurt the respondent No.2 (first informant).

4. Learned counsel further submitted that in the present case, the respondent No. 2 has amicably settled all his grievances/disputes and differences with the appellants vide compromise-cum-settlement, out of his own free will and without any coercion.

5. While buttressing his arguments, learned counsel has also placed reliance on the judgment of Hon"ble Supreme Court passed in Ramawatar v. State of Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 1393 of 2011) dated 25.10.2021, which has been dealt with subsequently.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant/respondent No.2 has stated that he has no objection, whatsoever to the settlement deed, the complainant has willfully entered into the said compromise, as such, the impugned order and present criminal proceedings be quashed on the basis of the said compromise.

7. Per Contra, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the instant Criminal Appeal and submitted that: The SC/ST Act is a special legislation passed to check and deter crimes against scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. The legislative intent to implement a specialized law has been to curb the incidents of indignities, humiliation and harassment meted out to the members of these communities. The present FIR is a classic case of mischief sought to be criminalized by this special statute, where accused persons tried to bully the First Informant side just on the basis of their caste. In the instant case, the appellants have intentionally terrorized and humiliated the first informant's side in pursuance of doing their work. The criminal offences of such grave nature cannot be compounded on the basis of settlement between the parties, otherwise if quashing is allowed on the basis of compromise, it would send a wrong message in the society; that