O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.133 of 2018 on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu, which was registered based upon the complaint given by the informant/R2, by invoking the provisions of The SC/ST Act.

2. The petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings pending against him on the following grounds:-

(i) No offence made out as against the petitioner (ii) No sanction for prosecution (iii) Ulterior motive to wreck vengence (iv) Inherently improbable prosecution (v) Delay in lodging FIR

3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-

The petitioner herein was working as Assistant General Manager in Air India Limited, Chennai and the informant/second respondent herein was working as Senior Manager (Flight Despatch) in Air India, Chennai (as a sub - ordinate to the petitioner). The Petitioner as AGM of the same section was duty bound to prepare, public maintain roaster of the sub-ordinate to delegate the work. It is a vital section and needs to be manned 24 x7 all 365 days on man-to-man replacement basis. Non-availability of technically qualified officers will affect flight services. The misunderstanding crept in between the informant and the petitioner due frequent non-adhering of the published roaster duty and non-cooperation with the Section by the informant. The informant availed unauthorized/unplanned leave/absented, thereby causing inconvenience not only to the petitioner but also to other officers working in the same Section, causing disruption to the office, due to which, the informant in the habit of frequently reporting sick over telephone and making himself unavailable for duty, more so unilaterally i.e., by merely informing the staff of Movement Control/Flight Dispatch section, without any prior sanction from the Section of the department on various dates, having note of the above, the department initiated disciplinary proceedings against the informant/second respondent, and through charge sheet dated 14.11.2017 framed five charges. In order to wreck vengeance, immediately the informant has foisted this false case against the petitioner.

4. In addition to the above, the informant is habitually abusing the process of law by preferring false complaint against various other authorities, under SC/ST Act, namely, Capt, S.Velraj (General Manager – Operations), Shri K.Subramanian (AGM Administration), Mr.Balaji (Senior Manager – Personnel), Mr.Anand Stephen, (AGM), and various others, including General Manager (Personnel) also is a member of SC/ST Liaison Officer, General Manager (Commercial), Vigilance Head Southern Region. As per the complaint given by the informant, FIR was registered bearing Crime No.360 of 2017 dated 20.11.2017 for offence under Section 3(1)(r), SC/ST Act against the petitioner herein for an occurrence said to taken place on 06.11.2017. After the completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed on 24.07.2018 against the petitioner for the offence under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of The SC/ST Act.

5. Notice was issued to the second respondent/informant. In spite of receipt, he has not appeared either himself or through his counsel. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appeared for the first respondent.

6. Contending that no offence was made out against the petitioner, the learned counsel would submit that the trial Judge took cognizance of the offence and framed charges on 11.12.2018 for offences under Sec.3(1)(r)(s), SC/SC Act. As per the charges, the petitioner while working as the AGM and Supervisory officer of the informant on 06.11.2017, he abused the informant by mentioning his caste name in the office corridor , ''.............v‹W T¿ mtiu mtkhddggL¤Jth® v‹W«, Ïijbašyh«

PM bghW¤J¡bfhŸs Koahkš Ï«khj« 6« nj kÂa« Rkh® 01.40 kâaséš mYtyf jhHthu¤Âš mtiu gh®¤j nghJ V‹ rh® vd¡F Ãu¢rid¡F nkš Ãu¢rid bfhL¡»Ö®fŸ v‹W.....''

7. The contention of petitioner is that the informant was not abused by him on that day and no such alleged occurren