The court ruled that for an offence under the SC/ST Act, abuse must occur in public view, which was not established, leading to quashing of proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

SHAMIM AHMED, J.

1. Heard Mr. Gibran Akhtar Khan, learned Counsel for the applicants, Ms. Ankita Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party No. 1 and perused the material placed on record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicants seeking quashing of the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 281/2022; Smt. Pooja vs. Kaushar and Others, under Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (S) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station-Bilgram, District-Hardoi as well as summoning order dated 09.04.2024 passed in the aforesaid case.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to village rivalry. He further submits that the brief facts of case are that on 05.11.2021 when applicant no. 2(Azam) reached home on his Motorcycle at about 1.00 p.m. he found that the Complainant’s Husband Bholanath and Complainant’s Brother Sunil were sitting at his doorstep and drinking alcohol, on which the applicant no. 2 (Azam) requested them not to drink alcohol at his doorstep, however the Complainant’s husband namely Bholanath, being in the state of inebriation, started hurling abusive words to the applicant no. 2 Azam and applicant no. 2, Azam requested the Complainant’s husband, not to utter abusive words for his family, but he didn’t stop, so applicant no. 2 (Azam) called the police at 1.26 pm by making a phone call at Dial 100 Emergency Service, and on seeing the Police Response Vehicle coming at around 2:00pm, the complainant’s husband ran away from his home. Applicants thought, that the matter has come to an end. He further submits that the applicants are the next door neighbors of the Complainant, and in the small narrow lane there are only two houses, one of complainant, and the other one is of the applicants.

4. Learned Counsel for the applicants further submits that on 11.01.2022, in an after thought manner, a frivolous complaint was filed by the Complainant (opposite party no. 2), falsely implicating the applicants for extorting money and as per the allegations made in the complaint, all the applicants who are four in number, using abusive words started beating the complainant (opposite party no. 2), and also the complainant’s husband with hands and feet, and the complainant and her husband were saved by the intervention of complainant’s brother and some village people. He further submits that in this entire incident surprisingly no injury was inflicted upon the body of the complainant and the complainant’s husband, and admittedly no medical examination was done. He further submits that it is unbelievable that four persons physically assaulted the complainant, who is a lady, and no injury was sustained by her. Moreover, the complainant’s husband was also physically assaulted by all the applicants as per the allegations made in the complaint, and no injury was inflicted upon him as well.

5. Learned Counsel for the applicants further submits that the statement of the complainant was recorded under section 200 Cr.P.C. but the same do not corroborate the version enumerated in the Complaint. There is no mention in the statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. that the applicants entered her house and gave blows with hands and kicks. Neither the statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. finds mention of one Rajpal and village people, as has been alleged in the complaint, who came to the rescue of complainant and her husband. Thus there is major contradiction in the statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the complaint dated 11.01.2022. He further submits that the statements recorded by the witnesses under section 202 Cr.P.C. also do not inspire any confidence that the alleged incident, did take place.

6. Learned Counsel for the applicants further submits that statement of the complainant’s brother recorded under Se