Back
SUBODH ABHYANKAR
Pramod Sadani – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent
ORDER
1. None for the respondent No.2, despite service of notice.
2. Heard finally.
3. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR dated 21.2.2024, lodged at Police Station Sarangpur, District Rajgarh at Crime No.98/2024 under sections 294, 452, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amended 2015), and the consequent criminal proceedings arising out of the aforesaid crime number.
4. In brief, the facts of the case are that the FIR in the present case was lodged on 21.2.2024, in respect of an incident which took place on 20.2.2024 between 12:00 to 13:00 hours in the noon, by the complainant Bulbul Katiya, D/o. Mukesh Katiya, alleging that she is a Class-12th student, and her father is having a property dispute with the accused persons since 2013, and on 20.2.2024, at around 12:00 to 1:00 p.m. in the noon, when she was studying and was alone at home, the accused Pradeep Sadani and Pramod Sadani came to her house and forced open the gate after kicking it, and also started abusing her and when she informed them that her father and mother
The Court emphasized the importance of evidence and the absence of a motive for the complainant to falsely implicate the petitioner, leading to the quashing of the FIR.
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.
Quashing petition under SC/ST Act dismissed as FIR allegations of caste abuse at public place prima facie disclose offences; courts accept averments at face value without evidence appreciation, civil....
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.
The absence of public view and specific derogatory remarks in the allegations results in insufficient grounds for prosecution under the Atrocities Act.
The court ruled that without corroborative evidence, mere allegations are insufficient to establish a prima facie case, particularly under SC ST Act provisions.
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
