Quashing of FIR denied; both cross cases must be tried together for justice.

RESERVED ON : 09^th JULY, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 28^th JULY, 2025 ORDER : ( PER : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. )

1 Present application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 initially for quashment of First Information Report vide Crime No.101/2022 dated 29.06.2022 registered with Police Station, Naigaon, Tq. Naigaon, Dist. Nanded, for the offence punishable under Sections 324 , 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and later on by way of amendment for quashing the proceedings in Regular Criminal Case No.1/2023 pending before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Naigaon.

2 Heard learned Advocate Mr. V.B. Patil for applicants, learned APP Mr. S.A. Gaikwad for respondent No.1 and learned Advocate Mr. S.B. Ghatol Patil for respondent No.2.

3 Learned Advocate for applicants has taken us through First Information Report and entire charge sheet and he submits that respondent No.2 has alleged that incident had taken place in front of his house around 12.00 p.m. on 15.06.2022, however, he has lodged First Information Report on 29.06.2022 and the delay has not been explained at all. In fact, applicant No.1 had lodged First Information Report on 17.06.2022 vide Crime No.96/2022 with the same Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 324, 323, 354, 354-D, 143, 147, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3 (1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(1)(w) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for the sake of brevity hereinafter referred to as “the Atrocities Act”). Certainly, to defeat the rights of present applicant No.1 a belated First Information Report has been lodged. Applicant Nos.1 and 2 are the members of Scheduled Castes. Informant had abused in the name of caste and family members of informant by forming unlawful assembly had assaulted and caused injuries to sister and mother of applicant No.1. Injuries are caused with the help of stick and axe. Under the said circumstance, it would be an abuse of process of law if the applicants are asked to face the trial.

4 Per contra, learned APP for respondent No.1 strongly opposed the application and submitted that there appears to be the cross cases and, therefore, the presence of other side is admitted by applicants. If we consider First Information Report lodged by applicant No.1 and First Information Report in the present matter, the time and place of incident appears to be the same and, therefore, this is not a fit case where this Court should exercise its powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned APP rather submitted that prior to the amendment to the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act the legal position was different. Section 14 and Section 2(1)(d) of the Atrocities Act i.e. prior to the amendment the Special Court was held to be a Court of Session and, therefore, it could not have taken cognizance directly as a Court of original jurisdiction without the case being committed to it by a Magistrate in view of Section 193 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In Gangula Ashok and another vs. State of A.P. [(2000) 2 SCC 504] this view was taken. However, later on with the amendment in the Act itself Section 14 provides for taking cognizance for the offence directly by the Special Court and, therefore, now, the charge sheets are presented before the Special Courts and Special Court takes cognizance. However, when it comes to the cross case, it is the cardinal principle that both the cases should be tried by the same Judge and, therefore, Regular Criminal Case No.1/2023 deserves to be transferred to the Special Court where the Special case on the basis of First Information Report No.96/2022 filed by present applicant No.1 is pending. He relies on the decision in Faizal and another vs. State of Kerala [(2024) 2 KLT 852], wherein under similar circumstances by taking recourse to Sectio