2024:BHC-AUG:22690-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

901 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2375 OF 2019 Dnyaneshwar Rohidas Wakale, Age 34 yrs., Occ. Agri., R/o Sonkheda, Tq. Khultabad, Dist. Aurangabad.

… Applicant … Versus …

1 The State of Maharashtra Through Investigation Officer, Police Station, Khultabad, Tq. Khultabad, Dist. Aurangabad. 2 Fakirrao Asaram Bhalerao, Age 41 yrs., Occ. Agri., R/o Khandipimpalgaon, Tq. Khultabad, Dist. Aurangabad.

… Respondents ...

Mr. R.V. Gore, Advocate for applicant Mr. V.K. Kotecha, APP for respondent No.1 Mr. P.B. Vikhe Patil, Advocate (appointed) for respondent No.2 ...

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &

S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ.

DATE : 19^th SEPTEMBER, 2024 ORDER : (PER : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.)

1 Present application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing criminal proceedings in Sessions Case No.121/2019 pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad arising out of offence vide Crime No.223/2018 dated 14.08.2018 registered with Khultabad Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad, for the offence punishable under Sections 295-A, 153-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 3(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for the sake of brevity hereinafter referred to as “Atrocities Act”).

2 Heard learned Advocate Mr. R.V. Gore for applicant, learned APP Mr. V.K. Kotecha for respondent No.1 and learned Advocate Mr. P.B. Vikhe Patil for respondent No.2.

3 It has been vehemently submitted by learned Advocate for applicant that perusal of First Information Report would show that one Rajesh Baburao Waghmare had posted a post in respect of Bharatratna late Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar on the informant’s mobile around 20.51 hours on 09.08.2018. Since it was objectionable post, informant felt insulted and gave a call to said Rajesh Waghmre and asked him who has posted the said post. Rajesh Waghmare told him that the said post was posted by one Chitte on WhatsApp of one Raju Patole and Chitte had also posted the said post on the WhatsApp of Rajesh Waghmare. Therefore, the informant and persons from his community made inquiry about the said post and came to know that the applicant had posted it on the WhatsApp group by name “Only Bhau” of Padali from his mobile. Therefore, the First Information Report has been lodged. In fact, police have not investigated as to whether the said post was created by the applicant. In fact, when he came to know about the objectionable post wrongly forwarded by him, he had tendered apology immediately on the group itself. The origin of the post has not been traced out by the police and, therefore, the applicant cannot be held responsible for the same, when even as per the First Information Report, the other persons had also forwarded the said post on the mobile of other persons. There was no intention on the part of applicant to hurt feelings of any community. The ingredients of offence under Section 153-A, 295-A of the Indian Penal Code and 3(v) of the Atrocities Act are not at all attracted. In fact, when the First Information Report came to be lodged initially, it was only under the Indian Penal Code Sections. It would be unjust to ask the applicant to face the trial. 4 Per contra, learned APP as well as learned Advocate appointed to represent the cause of respondent No.2 strongly opposed the application and submitted that if we consider the post that was posted, then certainly there was intention to defame one of the respected personalities, who was amongst the committee who framed our Indian Constitution. The objectionable part in the same as it was appearing is a photo, in which a person was seen urinating on the photograph of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar. Certainly, such act was not only objectionable but it was with an intention to cause prejudice to the harmony in the society and the religious feeling of the entire community from which the informant and the